The Assembly met at noon (Mr Speaker in the Chair).
Members observed two minutes’ silence.

Fur Farming (Prohibition) Bill: First Stage

Ms Brid Rodgers: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 8/01] to prohibit the keeping of animals solely or primarily for slaughter for the value of their fur; to provide for the making of payments in respect of the related closure of certain businesses; and for connected purposes.
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mr Speaker: The Bill will be put on the list of pending business until a date for its Second Stage is determined.

Limited Liability Partnerships Bill: First Stage

Sir Reg Empey: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 9/01] to make provision for limited liability partnerships.
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mr Speaker: The Bill will be put on the list of pending business until a date for its Second Stage is determined.

Committee Business: Change of Membership

The following motions stood in the Order Paper:
That Mr Arthur Doherty replace Mr Joe Byrne as a member of the Committee for Employment and Learning. — [Mr Tierney.]
That Mr Alban Maginness replace Ms Patricia Lewsley as a member of the Committee for Education. — [Mr Tierney.]

Mr Speaker: Two motions concerning Committee membership stand in the Order Paper in the name of Mr Tierney. However, Mr Tierney has advised me that he is unable to attend this afternoon’s sitting due to untoward circumstances. The two motions will, therefore, not be moved.

Establishment of Ad Hoc Committee on the Updating of Schedule 1 of the Northern Ireland Assembly Disqualification Act 1975

Resolved:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 48(7), this Assembly appoints an Ad Hoc Committee to consider the updating of Schedule 1 of the Northern Ireland Assembly Disqualification Act 1975 referred by the Secretary of State and to submit a report to the Assembly by 24 June 2002.
Composition: UUP 2 SDLP 2 DUP 2 SF 2 Other Parties 3
Quorum: The quorum shall be five.
Procedure: The procedures of the Committee shall be such as the Committee shall determine. — [ Mr Davis.]

Social Security (Disability Living Allowance) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2002:

Prayer of Annulment

The following motion stood in the Order Paper:
That the Social Security (Disability Living Allowance) (Amendment) Regulations (NI) 2002 be annulled. — [Mr Ford.]

Mr Speaker: I do not see Mr Ford in the House. That being the case, I am afraid that the motion falls.

Northern Ireland Energy Agency

The following motion stood in the Order Paper:
That this Assembly calls for the urgent establishment of a Northern Ireland energy agency to assess, plan and actively manage all aspects of energy procurement, supply and conservation in Northern Ireland. — [Dr McDonnell.]

Mr Speaker: I do not see Dr McDonnell in the House. However, in all reasonableness and fairness to the House, the Member would not have expected the motion to come at this time. Therefore, I propose that the sitting be suspended for five minutes to enable the House to gather itself. The House will now, by leave, suspend. The House is suspended.
The sitting was suspended at 12.06 pm.
On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Northern Ireland Energy Agency

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: I beg to move
That this Assembly calls for the urgent establishment of a Northern Ireland energy agency to assess, plan and actively manage all aspects of energy procurement, supply and conservation in Northern Ireland.
I am perhaps a little unprepared, as I anticipated speaking in an hour and a half. Nevertheless, I welcome the opportunity to speak, premature though it is.
The supply and use of energy is one of the biggest issues that affects us all. It affects everything from the personal cost of living to the costs of major industrialists, whether in service or manufacturing industries. It adds a considerable amount to the bills and overhead costs of any establishment, and, indeed, it adds a considerable amount to the Executive’s expenditure because the Civil Service Departments probably consume large amounts of energy and, therefore, large amounts of money — that energy costs perhaps 25% or 30% more than it should.
The Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, of which I am a member, spent months working hard on a range of energy issues and presented its report to the Assembly earlier this year. It was well received and, some weeks ago, Sir Reg Empey produced initial proposals for consultation.
During the preparation of the report, it became evident that there is very little stability, cohesion, certainty or security in the energy market. It is bitty, scattered and disorganised. I hope I am making my points in a non-contentious way. The island of Ireland is relatively small in energy terms. Indeed, we probably need a much more open energy market in these islands, including Scotland, Wales, England and the other regions involved. In the short term, I want the various aspects of energy to be opened up and joined up on an all-island basis.
I could go into the major debate about gas pipelines at length, but it is fairly obvious that gas connections are needed, both North/South and east-west with Scotland and England. Gas is opening up, and the electricity market needs to be opened up very quickly too.
I do not intend to go into the details of the generator contracts, which the House has debated at length before and which were also considered in the energy report. I know that the generators’ contracts — [Interruption].
I cannot hear myself, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: Order.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: Is Mr Weir finished?
We will debate at length whether we should buy out the generator contracts over the next eight years or leave them to fizzle out. Leaving them creates problems, because we must ask what will happen after 2010 or 2012. Will we end up with no locally generated electricity? Are our stations stable enough to produce electricity beyond 2012, or will their owners let them chug on inefficiently and switch them off in 2012?
A range of questions must be answered, and again I emphasise that they must be examined in an all-island perspective. Some people in Fermanagh have discovered that it is more efficient and effective to buy their electricity from the Electricity Supply Board (ESB) than from NIE. I suggest that the Southern Irish electricity market should be opened up and the ESB’s monopoly reviewed, but that is a matter for investigation by the North/South bodies.
It is not a question of our taking a daily or weekly look at the energy market or, as prices fluctuate, being chancers and buying cheap gas or a bit of cheap coal. If we are to produce stable energy for the twenty-first century, we must produce a 35- to 40-year plan for the direction in which the energy debate should go. Generators will not invest, because the life of a power station is 35 to 40 years, and no one will invest unless the outcome is known.
In a domestic situation, no one will invest in an oil-fired boiler if the price of oil is to go through the roof in two years’ time. Equally, if coal is to be out of date in three years’ time, no one will invest in a solid-fuel boiler. Gas is popular, but many people have no access to gas. The discussion and perspective must be balanced by what works in rural areas without gas and by what works in urban areas where gas is. I represent an urban constituency, and all too often matters are viewed from an urban perspective. The energy situation is just as important in Newtownstewart as it is on the Newtownards Road, and the needs of both must be addressed.
Although I welcome the efforts of the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and his Department over the last couple of years to work with the regulator to create some kind of stability, we must go further. To some extent, energy can be seen as being added on to, or piggy-backed by, a much bigger Enterprise, Trade and Investment job-creation agenda. Energy is like a motorbike sidecar — it is there when it is needed, but most of the time no one pays much attention to it. Primary concentration and a stronger group of people who are organised are needed to make a real difference in the energy market by finding supplies of energy — gas or whatever — and ensuring that those supplies are delivered at an affordable price.
I am concerned at the scatter of interests beyond those vested in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has a major responsibility for renewables. That includes the energy potential of biomass from willow and other rapidly grown softwoods. It also includes the potential for biogas production, whereby pig slurry can be used to produce copious methane gas that can then be used efficiently and effectively.
That was an outline of the agricultural issues. I could go on at length, but I do not want to delay the House unduly.
The issue should interest the Department of the Environment because of the potential to create considerable amounts of energy from much of the waste that is dumped in landfill sites, where it causes other problems. However, from the perspective of the man or woman on the street, most of the responsibility for energy conservation and fuel poverty, which results from houses being badly designed and built, lies with the Department for Social Development. The Department of the Environment is also responsible to some extent through its building control measures.
A plethora of energy issues permeates every Department. There are major contentions. The energy inquiry failed to resolve the debate on the burning of Orimulsion at Kilroot power station. Orimulsion is a tarry substance that can be burnt efficiently and effectively and, with the proper controls and chimney-washing measures, it is cleaner than either coal or oil. That issue must be resolved.
Unless energy prices come down by 25% to 30%, the local economy will be affected. Our economy is not as efficient, effective or welcoming as others are, and in a few years’ time, when grants and other incentives are tighter, investors will consider criteria such as energy prices. Although our well-trained, work-friendly workforce can be promoted in Europe and North America, the fact that our energy prices are excessive will rapidly counter our efforts.
Would it be worthwhile to buy out the contracts now, or would it be worthwhile to take the pain now in order to avail of the gain later? We must ensure that in the future we do not fall into the trap that the contracts created. Nevertheless, the contracts and the regulator must be considered. When the contracts expire in 2010, we must ensure that we have not created a free-for-all market, because we could be subject to either the fluctuations of the market or the power station being switched off by the operator if it did not like the price that it was receiving.
There is a long-term need, which must be thought out carefully, for the regulation and control of energy. Therefore, we must consider how best we can pull together all the components and interests that the Assembly has in energy issues. Those issues mainly involve the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, but the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Department of the Environment and the Department for Social Development are also involved.
I have no great sympathy for quangos, and I am not proposing that another quango be created simply for the sake of it. However, in this case, it is prudent to consider the formation of a twenty-first-century quango with the remit to either produce the goods or to be wound up after a set period.
I do not want to go on too long; I have probably talked for long enough. However, I would like to mention fuel poverty. I remind Colleagues that the last statistics showed that approximately 170,000 of our households — 28% — are in fuel poverty. I hope that the number has been reduced a little since then.
Fuel poverty is when people cannot afford enough energy or fuel to keep themselves and their homes warm. It is a scandal that, in this day and age, 28% of our population are in fuel poverty. Although I have not dwelt on energy conservation at length, it is a big part of the equation. We must tackle fuel poverty, and, in order to have the teeth necessary to do so, we need an energy agency. The agency must cover all aspects of energy, from the beginning of the energy production process to its ultimate consumption, with the customer switching on an electric kettle or other appliance.
There is great excitement about gas at the moment, and for people in the Belfast region and some other towns who can access it, gas seems to be clean, efficient and cheaper than oil and other fuel sources. We have been promised large supplies of gas from the Corrib gas field off the west of Ireland, and that may last for 10 or 15 years. In 20 or 25 years’ time we, or those who succeed us in the Chamber, might return to the debate, because it may be necessary to procure gas supplies from places such as Siberia and pipe it across Europe. That would be a major task, and it is why this issue is too big for the present structure to handle.
We need a dedicated team under the structure of a special agency, which would report regularly to the Assembly or to the appropriate Ministers, to pull the fragmented energy framework together. Such an agency would co-ordinate the existing structure and set us up strongly for the future. I urge Members to support the motion.

Mr Conor Murphy: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. Sinn Féin broadly welcomes the objectives of the motion, but with some reservations. This debate, and the establishment of an agency, might bring about a much-needed examination of our energy situation. Major long-term structural problems with energy arrangements must be addressed.
The proposed energy agency has merits, since it could bring much-needed co-ordination and planning to the generation and supply of energy. The motion further proposes that conservation — energy efficiency — be included in the agency’s remit, and that suggestion is welcome. There are stringent targets for the control of energy consumption in the North of Ireland, and electricity generation from renewable or sustainable methods has been proposed. Such an agency could provide the necessary clout and co-ordination to meet our needs. Too often we hear about the barriers that people generating electricity from renewable or sustainable methods encounter when they attempt to spill their extra capacity onto the grid. The proposed agency could streamline that process and support electricity production from those means.
It has been suggested that the agency’s remit would include assessing the energy needs of the Six Counties in the medium and longer term, and it could build on the British Cabinet Office’s recent energy review. The agency would need to examine the expansion of the gas network and the impact that lack of access to natural gas might have on the competitiveness and economic development of our rural community. It should be further tasked with proposing plans to overcome that disadvantage.
Any such agency must also have a pivotal role in the development of the all-Ireland energy infrastructure, and its remit would need to be expanded to encompass the whole of Ireland or any other reciprocal arrangement when the all-Ireland infrastructure is established.
However, I am concerned because the Administration does not need another quango. Given that we wish to curb public administration, we must think long and hard about the financial liability and the implications of such a body. Will the public bear the burden of such an agency, and will its effectiveness and efficiency make the expenditure worthwhile?
My final reservation is the most significant. There are long-term problems with the energy infrastructure in the North of Ireland, as evidenced by high electricity prices and the lack of access to natural gas. The proposed role and remit of the energy agency may help by tinkering at the edges but will not begin to address the fundamental problems of fuel poverty and commercial competitiveness, which must be dealt with.
Sinn Féin believes that it is time to explore fully all possibilities for solving the problems created by the expensive and archaic energy infrastructure that we inherited. Westminster has retired from the picture, happy in the knowledge that it has reaped millions of pounds from the sale of the North’s generation and supply industry. This has resulted in high prices for consumers and high profits and dividends for shareholders. It is time for a full and open debate on all potential solutions. Consumers will pay through their electricity bills for the Moyle interconnector with Scotland. However, only the shareholders will benefit from the profits of electricity trading on the interconnector, which is socially and economically unjust.
An energy agency might help to deal with the immediate issues of co-ordinating generation, supply and energy efficiency. However, for Sinn Féin to support such an initiative, the agency would have to be more than a quango: it would require a radical agenda for mapping and planning energy issues throughout Ireland for the next 50 years. The proposed agency does not go far enough to address the real energy issues in the North of Ireland, and Sinn Féin believes that it is time to open the debate fully. Go raibh maith agat.

Mr Sean Neeson: I thank Dr McDonnell for bringing this matter to the attention of the House. Energy is of great interest to me and to the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee, which presented its report to the Assembly on 13 March 2002. The inquiry was expected to last a matter of weeks but took almost a year. The subject is of great interest to me because 20 years ago one of my predecessors appointed me as the Alliance Party spokesperson on energy, and I have had the remit ever since.
I agree in principle with the motion, but we must give further consideration to what Dr McDonnell is trying to achieve. There is an overlap in the work of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and that of the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland. It is important to clarify what the proposed agency’s role would be.
Once again, I must express my disgust at the Oil Distributors’ Association’s interference. It is trying to create obstacles to the extension of the natural gas pipeline to the north-west. It is disgraceful that an unregulated sector should do that. The price differential across Northern Ireland is outrageous, particularly for domestic consumers. If an agency were established, it would be important that it examine all aspects of energy consumption in Northern Ireland, including petrol. One need only look around Northern Ireland to see the major price differentials and the unacceptable levels of the importation of illegal petrol and diesel. Therefore the remit of the agency should be shown in greater detail.
We all want to see a level playing field for all consumers in Northern Ireland, and that is why the Committee and I have been so keen for as many areas of Northern Ireland as possible to benefit from natural gas. The Department will introduce its energy Bill soon, and I look forward to that. Although I am not speaking as the Deputy Chairperson of the Committee, it also looks forward to the publication of the Bill. One of the issues to be addressed is the strengthening of the role of those with responsibility for consumer affairs. In the Committee’s report, which was presented to the Minister and the Department, we outlined the need to ensure that there are adequate resources to deal with consumer affairs.
Finally, such an agency would have to take the European dimension into consideration. When the Committee visited Denmark and Brussels last September we became aware of the impact of European Directives on the energy market throughout an expanding European Union. I agree with Dr McDonnell when he talked about the possibility of using natural gas from as far away as Siberia. We can look forward to some exciting opportunities in the future, and I look forward to the enlargement of the European Union, which will provide other major opportunities. In principle, I accept the spirit of the motion, and I look forward to the Minister’s response.

Ms Jane Morrice: I declare an interest, as my sister is involved in the gas business in the Fermanagh/Sligo area. I have a great interest in energy issues, particularly the renewable sector, from my work with the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee.
I will begin by thanking Dr McDonnell for bringing the matter to the Floor of the House. The Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee certainly had lengthy debate on the issue when compiling its report on energy, but it is valuable to keep the issue alive in our minds and in the minds of the public and the press. Having said that, I agree with Sean Neeson when he said that he agrees with the spirit of the motion. I am slightly concerned — and this also applied to a previous motion proposed by Dr McDonnell — about any suggestion to set up agencies, given the possibility of duplicating work. However, the value of this motion is to concentrate minds on the need to do something better. I totally agree that there needs to be a streamlining of the joined-up government approach to energy issues.
That is vitally important, because energy, as we have discovered, takes in many different departmental responsibilities. These include social, economic and health issues ranging from fuel poverty to energy conservation and energy efficiency. We desperately need some form of streamlining. I wonder whether there is justification for an agency, but some sort of team, task force or joined-up government approach would certainly be valuable.
We must consider the importance of the all-Ireland approach — the North/South approach — to energy programming. Although the North/South dimension is important, I agree with Members that we cannot deal with the issue by having an island mentality. There must be an east-west approach, involving the British-Irish isles, and a European dimension. That would cover not only the examples of best practice we saw during our trip to Denmark, when we learnt about the energy market there, but also tapping into energy in Europe and countries beyond the former Iron Curtain. The global aspect must be included, but it will be difficult to achieve that if we have a single unit in Northern Ireland. The onus is on the British-Irish Council and the North/South Ministerial Council to see this as a priority for work in infrastructure.
Last, but by no means least, is my bandwagon — the renewable energy sector. We are lagging too far behind in that area. Nevertheless, good, healthy momentum has been achieved. There has been great progress on wind farming. I welcome the plans for the wind farm off the north coast, but I wonder about them. I would appreciate a progress report outlining what the potential delays might be.
This is definitely the energy source of the future. We must move away from fossil fuels. We do not even have to keep up with the demands of European Directives; we can go further. Why can we not develop the technology for the new energy markets using wind, wave, tides, and biomass? Why can we not use our agriculture industry to provide us with renewable energy? This is the way forward for our economy. It would allow us to use our university research to develop new technologies, and it would be good for consumers. We are talking about healthy social and economic development — renewable energy is about that.

Mr Arthur Doherty: This is the twenty-first century — however, we are inclined to forget it, as many people are still deeply rooted in the late seventeenth century. Some people are trying to solve our political problems using seventeenth century methods marked by appalling bigotry, superstition and violence. Despite the greatest efforts of our best people — our active visionaries — the Enlightenment has passed by too many of our leaders. The vision enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement is beyond their understanding: so much for Dark Ages politics.
Things become a little better when we look at social, economic and technological thought and achievement. As an SDLP Back-Bencher, I blush prettily, but modestly, at the knowledge that the SDLP is at the forefront of progressive political thought and because it has so much to offer in the social, cultural and economic fields.
I welcome Dr McDonnell’s initiative. The provision of economical, reliable, safe energy is essential for economic prosperity and the health and well-being of the entire community. It is scandalous that the neediest and the most vulnerable have the greatest dependence on the most expensive and least healthy fuels. For their sake and that of the economy and environment, the generation and supply of energy must be brought out of the early twentieth century and into the twenty-first. We have the power sources and the technology; all we need is the will and a great deal of co-operation from many people and organisations. That would include involving those who are concerned about protecting and improving the environment. It would involve the quickest possible move away from fossil fuels.
We all know about the "polluter pays" principle, and most would agree with it. The harsh reality is that we pay the polluters to heat and to light our homes and to power our factories and vehicles. The cost is not only monetary; we pay with our bad health, the desperate pressure on our social services and the poorer quality of our lives.
We need a body with substantial independence from the power producers and providers. That would be the only way to emphasise energy production from our plentiful renewable resources, which Jane Morrice highlighted. We have endless supplies of wind, water, and, unfortunately, waste. I thoroughly approve of wind farms. Concerns about their visual impact on the environment could be eased through sensitive management.
I will devote the rest of my precious time to Sandy Bain, whose letter to the ‘Sunday Herald’ in Scotland was published on 17 March 2002. Like a good Irish politician, I was in Scotland on that day.
The letter reads:
"It is disappointing that so much of the debate about Scotland’s energy needs 10 or more years in the future is being conducted with reference to 20th century technology. The coming pollution-free fuel is hydrogen. … More importantly, however, using electricity from renewable sources to produce hydrogen will give a much greater degree of flexibility.
Electricity derived from wind, wave and tidal power at locations along the northwest coast and in the Western Isles should be used to produce hydrogen from sea water. This hydrogen would then be transported by sea in gas tankers to the existing coastal thermal power stations at Peterhead, Inverkip, Cockenzie and Longannet, adapted to use hydrogen as fuel. The electricity produced would be distributed to consumers through the existing national grid, removing the need to lay an expensive subsea cable or despoil our scenic areas with overhead lines. The unreliability of renewable sources of electricity will be overcome too. Ideally Clyde shipyards would build the gas tankers required and Scottish engineering companies would become market leaders in building the hydrogen production plants and doing power station conversions. Any surplus hydrogen could, of course, be exported worldwide."
Sandy, quite naturally, speaks for Scotland. However, our scenario is so similar that what would be good for Scotland could be equally good for us, by which I mean everyone on this island. That is why I wanted Sandy’s words to be recorded in Hansard and to be food for thought when Dr McDonnell’s agency is set up, as I hope it will be soon.

Mr Roy Beggs: I support the concept of a greater co-ordination of energy supply and conservation in Northern Ireland to protect our environment and to reduce electricity prices for residential and industrial consumers. Northern Ireland suffers from some of the highest prices in Europe, and those key issues must be addressed so that we can remain competitive, continue to protect our environment and respect it more.
Is the proposed agency needed or will it simply duplicate other projects? Would it try to draw strands together and form another layer of bureaucracy in this small part of the United Kingdom? That must be considered carefully. Should we examine how we could restructure our present system? The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has an interest in willow biomass and electricity production through the farming industry. Should responsibility for those matters be transferred? In addition, the Department for Social Development is interested in energy conservation. Should that role be transferred so that one area deals with the supply and conservation of electricity?
Perhaps the Department for Social Development’s role in identifying those suffering from fuel poverty should become a key aspect of its work. There may also be scope for the issue to be included in the review of public administration. The restructuring of Departments is not the issue; subject to agreement, some sections of Departments might logically sit somewhere else.
I have not heard much about how OFREG will fit into this plan. Will it become defunct? I value OFREG’s independence and believe that its powers should be increased. It is disappointing that OFREG has not been as successful as we would have liked in driving down electricity prices in Northern Ireland.
Improvements are necessary. The electricity contracts that were handed out during direct rule were a licence to print money, and that was of no benefit to the people of Northern Ireland. NIE is moving towards electricity generation through the Huntstown power station in the Republic of Ireland. The grey area is becoming larger. Is NIE an independent distributor or a generator? Does it give greater priority to the profits of its shareholders than it does to the interests of the people of Northern Ireland? That question must be answered.
OFREG’s powers should be increased to favour the consumer. Considering the initial investment in their shares, the private companies have made healthy profits. Increased downward pressure on prices should now be applied. There have been benefits by way of improvements to the generating equipment, but that has been transmitted into their profits.
Nationalist Members have emphasised the all-island aspect. However, we must fit into the United Kingdom structures of electricity production and regulation. The Kyoto agreement provided for that, and we must abide by it. There are two sides to the coin. There is a United Kingdom and a European aspect as well as the all-Ireland aspect. We must ensure that any benefits are delivered to the consumer. A sizeable electricity interconnector is now on-stream, which is also applying downward pressure on electricity prices in Northern Ireland.
I consider Dr McDonnell’s proposals to be at the early stages. It would be premature to jump now. Further consideration is required, and I look forward to hearing what Dr McDonnell and the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment have to say in reply.

Mrs Annie Courtney: I support the motion. However, other issues must be highlighted. The Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment’s energy inquiry concluded that if we were ever to get an efficient system, it should have as wide a remit as possible, possibly on an all-Ireland basis, and it should conform to EU Directives.
It has been obvious for some time that the energy industry needs an all-Ireland remit if it is to have a stable future. After the storms in the winter of 1998, when lines came down and many people suffered a miserable Christmas and new year, the industry invested in greater volume, modern installations and upgraded lines. However, the problem remains that NIE has a monopoly, with Belfast being the only area that has the alternative of British Gas.
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair)
This system has proved effective — it is more economical and it provides consumer choice. Renewable energy is becoming more effective, but it still falls far short of Government proposals. The recent decision to install a North/South, east-west gas pipeline throughout Ireland will be a real boost for the north-west of Northern Ireland and for Donegal. The Oil Promotion Federation has taken the matter to the EU to try to prevent that, and that says more about the federation than anyone else could. The Oil Promotion Federation is not controlled, and it is regulated by providers and consumers. The federation calling "foul" brings to mind the pot and the kettle. I support the call for a Northern Ireland energy agency to assess, plan and actively manage all aspects of energy procurement, supply and conservation in Northern Ireland.
Members supported the report produced by the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and I agree that, in the short term, a Northern Ireland energy agency would ensure that our aims are achieved sooner rather than later, and it would provide consumer choice to more people.

Sir Reg Empey: Ms Morrice said that she welcomed the fact that the motion was keeping the issue alive in our minds and that it was allowing us to remain focused on a matter that was important to everyone. I entirely agree that the debate achieves that objective. I have listened carefully to Dr McDonnell calling for the establishment of a Northern Ireland energy agency. However, I point out that his proposal goes much further than the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment’s recommendation in its report on the energy inquiry. It simply said that the agency idea should be considered. There is no suggestion in the Committee’s report that the wider proposition was seriously examined. However, I intend to respond fully to the Committee’s report in the near future and to deal with some of those issues.
I agree, to some extent, with Mr Neeson, Ms Morrice and Mr Beggs that the call for an agency is somewhat premature. We must remember that the energy sector in Northern Ireland is privatised. All the generation is in private hands, as is the distribution. However, in the Republic the generation is primarily in the control of the state. The Committee visited Denmark to look at its model. The Danish Energy Agency is responsible for climate change negotiations, oil and gas exploration, research programmes and bilateral programmes with Eastern European countries. In other words, it is a significant body that interfaces with powers far and beyond any that devolution would have. It is responsible for oil and gas exploration, for example, so it is a very different animal. Many Members have referred to the desirability of greater co-ordination, and I have no difficulty with that. It is entirely common sense that where several Departments have at least some degree of interest in a subject they should co-ordinate. However, it is impossible to get every subject matter that has a cross-departmental activity gathered together in one place.
Many issues and themes in Government are cross-cutting. I accept what Members have said about fuel poverty. However, I recently attended the opening of a scheme in my East Belfast constituency. A home had been fitted with gas central heating, insulation et cetera under a pilot scheme that the Department for Social Development was carrying out in Belfast. Insufficient applications had been made to use all the money available on the pilot scheme, although it was fantastic to see what had been achieved. For example, hundreds of home helps in Belfast spend hundreds of man-hours lighting fires for people, yet those facilities could be installed cheaply and efficiently, and would prove less hassle for someone who is unable to get around easily. It is a terrible shame that the scheme is not receiving the level of support that we would like. I sympathise with the objectives to which Dr McDonnell and other Members referred.
My Department recently published a consultation paper, ‘Towards a New Energy Market Strategy for Northern Ireland’, which recognised the interaction between energy and other priorities such as climate change, social inclusion, fuel poverty, health and equality. That echoes my previous point that many energy issues are cross-cutting. The paper posed the question of how an integrated approach to the issue might be secured, and we are currently analysing the responses that we received.
I cannot say with absolute conviction that all the energy concerns that have come before the Assembly would have been solved more easily if an organisation of that kind existed; we must remember that we deal with a privatised industry. The energy issue is in no way "bolted on" to the Department’s activities; I view it as a mainstream part of my work. I was surprised in that I underestimated the amount of time and effort that that would take, all because the energy sector is a privatised industry. I spend much of my time on the issue, as do my officials. A division of the Department is dedicated to energy.
Members will be aware that, in the current session, I intend to introduce a utilities Bill to deal with a range of issues, including the consumer arrangements and the situation with regard to the regulator, which Mr Beggs mentioned. I accept that a range of issues must be dealt with.
Mr Neeson referred to the European dimension. We hope to achieve more market opening, as that is the trend in the European Union, and we hope that that will bring down prices. It is frustrating that we have been unable to bring proposals to the House that will achieve reductions; however, I hope that those proposals will emerge in the coming weeks. I do not despair, because the situation has been changing for the better in the past couple of years. A new combined-cycle power station is under construction at Ballylumford. That will introduce state-of-the-art generating equipment, which will produce electricity more efficiently than the current station does. As the consumer will pay fuel costs directly, electricity will be produced more efficiently, which will have a downward impact on prices.
A project, which includes the extension of the gas pipeline, has been earmarked for Coolkeeragh. However, I share the anger of some Members at what has been happening there, and the attempts that have been made to frustrate a strategic decision. As Dr McDonnell said, Coolkeeragh has had a power station for 30 or 40 years and someone is making decisions on the basis of what may happen to the plant’s profits in the next six or 12 months. We must plan strategically for energy production for future generations, given that the infrastructure is so expensive.
If the Coolkeeragh power station developments take place, they will result in a state-of-the-art, highly efficient gas turbine. Mr Beggs referred to the Moyle interconnector, which has come on-stream and which will help to bring competition into the market in the long term.
The renewable energy sector has potential, but there are limitations to the use of renewables in Northern Ireland. For example, the geography here does not enable us to create meaningful amounts of hydroelectricity. My Department and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development are interested in biomass, anaerobic digesters and other new technologies, and we will be pursuing those options. However, such technologies have a long way to go before they can deliver electricity at commercial prices.
Wind energy is one area in which we may have made more progress. However, Members must understand that there are lessons to be learnt from privatisation when dealing with renewables. Although we may be anxious to introduce renewables into the mainstream energy system, we must plan carefully and be cautious about the cost. There is no point in producing renewable energy that is so expensive that no one can buy it.
Apart from wind energy, the renewable energy technologies have a long way to go. My Department will wish to discuss those matters further with the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment as we move towards introducing policies concerning renewables.
Jane Morrice and Arthur Doherty mentioned offshore wind farms. That method of energy production has potential and, as Members may know, my Department, in conjunction with the Department of Public Enterprise in the Republic, prepared a report on the options for wind energy production, particularly offshore production, around the island. The Tunes Plateau site, situated off the north coast of Northern Ireland, emerged as a strong possibility. Discussions between the Crown Estate and a possible applicant are at a delicate stage, and I cannot predict the outcome. If the project were to proceed, a substantial period of public consultation on the environmental impact would be required. I am not in a position to say whether it will proceed.
I welcome the fact that energy management is being kept on the agenda, because it is an area of activity that has been neglected. Reference was made to the unfortunate contracts that were entered into several years ago. Those contracts have now run for over half of their allotted time, and we have spent much time examining the matter.
I accept the spirit of the motion, but I am not convinced that setting up another quango would add to the sum of knowledge on the issue. I am not trying to pour cold water on the motion, because I fully understand the Member’s concerns. The spirit of the motion is going in the right direction, and I accept that there needs to be a joined-up approach. However, bearing in mind that we are dealing with the private sector, I am concerned that another body might not achieve better results than those that can be achieved by adapting existing systems and ensuring that there is the sort of cross-departmental activity that already exists in other areas. I want to discuss the matter further with the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and I hope to be able to say something on this when making a formal response to the Committee’s valuable report.
Action has already been taken on the matter that Mr Beggs raised about different Departments having bits and pieces of interest across the subject. For example, the Department for Social Development deals with fuel poverty, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment has interests in wider energy issues and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development also has energy-related interests. Following devolution, the Department for Regional Development was considered to have a strategic energy role. In fact, that Department did not have the statutory basis or the staff for such. It was a kind of anomaly. The proposal is to draft an Order to incorporate responsibility for energy again in my Department. Functions have already been moved around, and that may happen again. From time to time it may be that functions will not be in the right place and will have to be moved around.
With regard to linkages, while energy is being considered in an all-Ireland context, my Department is considering it in a European context. The island of Ireland is a tiny energy market in international terms. Over the years, Northern Ireland’s problem has been isolation from major sources of supply. The Department’s objective is to ensure that we do not remain isolated. That is why I am pleased that we now have gas and electricity interconnection with Great Britain, which will progress to a European connection. That will ensure that we have supply reinforcement and do not depend on one source. That was the rock on which we perished in the 1970s when we were entirely dependent on oil. That was ruinous, and I warmly welcome the opening-up of sources of supply. That is the best way to bring prices down in the long term, once contracts are dealt with.
I welcome the debate and appreciate the interest and concern of Members, which I share. I assure them, and particularly Dr McDonnell, that I do not regard the Department’s responsibility for energy as a sidecar on a bike. I regard it to be mainstream, and officials will confirm that because they put much time and effort into energy. It is important. I also hope that if the Assembly brings the Bill forward during this session, it will address the range of significant matters that concern Members, particularly on the consumer side, about who operates the system — the transmissions operator — and buying and selling. All of those matters must be considered.
I will respond in detail to the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. However, I cannot yet support the Member’s proposal for another body. The Assembly must wait and see and discuss further with the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment to decide whether the draft legislation will achieve its objectives. We should not yet proceed to create another agency.
I understand the merits of what the Member has said and the need for a co-ordinated, strategic long-term view. However, I am not convinced that another non-departmental public body attached to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment would achieve our shared objectives. I ask the Member to address that point in his summing-up.
When the Assembly votes on the motion it should consider the Cabinet Office’s major energy review, which was published in February 2002 and which was mentioned by Mr Conor Murphy. The review considered new institutional arrangements for energy policy-making and delivery. A cross-departmental unit is being created in the Department of Trade and Industry in London with its future position subject to review depending on the roles of climate change, energy policy and transport policy within the Government. That document did not consider removing those critical issues from direct departmental and ministerial responsibility and putting them into an agency. However, we will watch that development closely because there may be lessons to be learned.
I am satisfied that the structures of our devolved Administration are capable of ensuring that the Executive’s policies are effectively and jointly established and managed without necessarily having a major reorganisation of the type proposed in the motion. The present arrangements ensure clarity of responsibility and accountability and avoid unnecessary cost and disruption. Therefore, while it is not appropriate to support the motion now, I accept the spirit in which it was moved. I also accept without any hesitation the sentiments that many Members expressed.
As we progress this year, we will collectively be able to make progress in the energy field. As has been pointed out, energy is vital to our competitiveness because the higher the cost, the harder it is to be competitive. That, of course, ties in with debates on rating policy, local government financing and other issues. I am keener than anybody to ensure that we get over the hump of high energy costs because they are a direct challenge to our competitiveness and affect jobs.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: I repeat my thanks to every Member who spoke. The debate was useful, although it came earlier than expected and was perhaps a little surprise to some. However, we got it together reasonably well, and most issues were aired. I am indebted to Members who took the time to collect their thoughts, to prepare speeches and to contribute to the debate.
The purpose of tabling the motion was to keep the energy issue alive — it is a big issue that is never quite top of the agenda. It is third or fourth on the agenda, and it should be higher. Most Members welcomed the principle and thrust of the motion, which was to do exactly that and create some form of joined-up strategy. It is fairly clear that, from whatever corner of the Chamber, we agree that we must find a more effective mechanism to deal with energy.
I welcome the Minister’s comments about legislation that may be coming forward. However, we need some sort of a driver. That was my concern when I tabled the motion. I have seen the good work of the Department and OFREG, and I have the highest regard for the regulator and the many consumer and pressure groups that have been working to combat fuel poverty. However, someone must drive the policy forward because, mostly, it just reacts to a difficulty or shortfall.
We must also make progress on energy procurement, which may be a major issue in the long term, and conservation. Much of that concerns the Department of the Environment, given its responsibility for building control and the quality of buildings.
The report is an excellent document, but it is only fair to say that the issues are so vast and so greatly in need of debate that a permanent committee could have dealt with the subject of energy alone. That is not to do the report any disservice. We had to draw a line somewhere, and, unfortunately, we could not go into every detail. This debate supplements the report. If the Minister does not get the recommendations right, we will come back, and perhaps keep coming back, to the issue. That is a compliment to the Minister, rather than a threat.
I want to thank specific Members. Conor Murphy welcomed the report and made a very good contribution. I agree with all his points. There may be a major need to deal with structural and conservation problems. I was not particularly confining myself, as he seemed to suggest, to Northern Ireland or the Six Counties. I see a very strong all-Ireland dimension in this, just as there is a very strong British dimension. It is not a political all-Ireland dimension; it is purely a business dimension to ensure survival. Overriding all that is the European dimension, both in legislation and in long-term supply. If we adopt gas, we shall be able to obtain it from the Corrib field in the west of Ireland for perhaps 10 to 15 years. After that, we shall have to explore eastern Europe, into Russia and perhaps beyond.
Conor Murphy made a point about this being another quango. We should get rid of most quangos. However, there are some good ones, so we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We should not be averse to creating a quango for tomorrow if a scattered issue such as energy needs a focus and a driver. I return to the concept of drivers because the scatter creates a situation in which we react to emergencies and crises rather than taking a proactive, long-term view.
I thank Sean Neeson for mentioning overlaps and for clarifying who does what. That returns to the driver principle. I am sure that we all agree with what he said about the oil companies, about strengthening the role of those responsible for consumer affairs and about the European dimension.
Jane Morrice agreed with the spirit of the motion and emphasised the need to avoid duplication. I do not want to see any duplication.
Roy Beggs supported the principle of the motion, but expressed some worry about the agency’s functions. The agency’s functions concern a proactive and aggressive view of the energy situation. I do not suggest duplication, but a much harder and clearer focus on the future is necessary. Mr Beggs queried the all-Ireland aspect. There is such an aspect, and the Minister articulated that much better than I could have done. However, there is also an east-west aspect, with the European dimension overlying it all.
The Minister mentioned that most energy is privatised, and that those private companies are fairly shrewd and capable of finding ways around regulations. An aggressive organisation is needed to confront them.
I have the highest regard for the regulator. However, he would be the first to admit that his difficulty is that both the legislation and his authority are limited. In many cases he reacts like the rest of us do to a crisis or difficulty. He has no responsibility for the long-term supply of energy; he can deal only with the day-to-day situation and attempt to ensure that tomorrow will be a little better than today, and that prices will be kept under control.
Arthur Doherty spoke of mobilising goodwill and of moving away from fossil fuels. He also mentioned the health issue. Some interesting comments on hydrogen have come from Scotland.
Annie Courtney talked of the gas industry in general and of the gas pipeline for the north-west. That is vital. It does not concern getting gas only to Coolkeeragh, but to every town along the route where it would not otherwise be economical to do so.
I thank the Minister for his kind comments. He may be correct to suggest that the call for the agency is premature, but will it be premature in six months or in a year?
I dealt with the question of energy in private hands. That is not a bad thing, if we take an aggressive approach and are equal to a situation in which those private hands perhaps play games or milk the system.
Those members of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment who visited Denmark were impressed. When the Minister spoke of the Danes, the powers and authorities, I was not sure whether he advocated the setting up of a new department of energy, not simply an agency. The Danes’ approach is aggressive. They have taken energy seriously, and that has stood them in good stead. Their energy costs have been considerably reduced and there have been environmental benefits.
The Minister mentioned the fuel poverty implications of renewable energy. The point that I made about the all-Ireland dimension is summed up by the fact that Northern Ireland was isolated previously. Even now, the few electricity interconnectors with the South, and the one with Scotland, are relatively trivial. We need a second interconnector with Scotland, because it is impossible to have an energy market without a supply. Our problem is that all of the energy supply going through the interconnector with Scotland is committed, and that given that the take up of energy in the South is so high, it does not have surplus to send through the cross-border interconnectors. The Minister is frowning. Is my statement incorrect?

Sir Reg Empey: The infrastructure is in place to facilitate a substantial amount of trading through the interconnector with the Republic. However, the distribution network on the Southern side is not sufficiently robust, and for technical reasons it can only operate at full capacity for short periods of time. Therefore, for most of the time, it operates at substantially less than half of its capacity.
When I attended the recent opening of the interconnector with Mary O’Rourke TD, electricity was being imported to Northern Ireland: given the good weather then, our local power stations decided to close some sets for maintenance. Therefore, current was being sucked through the interconnector to Northern Ireland. However, because of demand, current is exported most of the time. The big advantage is that the process reduces spinning reserve, which is generating capacity that is spinning but not supplying current. It is there in case a breakdown occurs, and that, coupled with the ability to trade nation-to-nation through the interconnectors with Scotland and the South, is the key advantage. There are technical reasons for the interconnector not working to full capacity, and work is continuing to improve it so that it becomes more efficient.
A high percentage of the electricity from the interconnector is traded on the open market — only about 125 megawatts are contracted.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: I stand corrected. My brief visits to power stations have convinced me that it is difficult to be an expert on such highly technical matters.
When I proposed the motion, I felt that we needed to create the stability, consistency and confidence in our energy markets that have been lacking. Energy markets have been unstable and, perhaps, that was emphasised most in the 1970s, when we were heavily dependent on oil. Many people who depend on oil are uneasy about the potential for shenanigans in Iraq that would send oil prices through the roof.
We must ensure that energy is supplied at a reasonable price and that people can access it fairly. People who live close to the border may access electricity easily from the Electricity Supply Board (ESB) across the border, but we must ensure that people who live in rural areas such as Belleek or Killeter are not compounded further into fuel poverty or energy poverty. I strongly endorse the message that there should be no duplication.
I am very interested in renewable sources of energy. Wind power could supply 25% to 30% of our electricity requirement. Wave power is interesting, and I appeal to the Minister to consider seriously the mouth of Strangford Lough. I have been told that if we could persuade other interested parties to co-operate, which might be a bigger task than first thought, the mouth of Strangford Lough could produce up to 30% of our energy requirements.

Ms Jane Morrice: I am aware of the strong tide in Strangford Lough. Although the construction of a tidal barrage is a valuable option, many people have serious concerns about the environmental impact on that part of the lough.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: That exemplifies how contentious and serious the issues are. I sympathise with those who have an environmental interest in Strangford Lough, but in a couple of years we will have to choose between a view across the lough but higher electricity prices, and a perhaps less exciting environment but cheaper electricity.
An energy agency could oversee the introduction of combined heat and power. I am told that Kilroot power station — and Mr Neeson would know more about that than I — could provide Carrickfergus with free hot water and central heating. However, where is the connectivity between the power station and the consumer? The Department for Social Development would not oversee the scheme; an agency is needed to glue the pieces together. Great work is being done, but the bodies that are involved must be pulled together.
When we burn oil, we extract only one third of its energy to generate electricity. The remaining two thirds are released into the air or, as unused hot water, into the sea. The Danes have managed to extract 90% of the energy from the fuel that they consume, and we should try to do the same.
Ten years ago, we began the charade of talking about introducing an open market and privatisation. We cannot have an open market without choice, and, although the Minister’s comments about the interconnectors are welcome, that is only a first step. There is not enough choice, and there are big gaps — for example, the failure to develop the combined heat and power mechanism at Kilroot. Such matters must be acted upon, but I am unsure whether responsibility lies with the Department for Social Development, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, or another body. I tabled the motion to try to clear the bottlenecks for which nobody seems to be responsible.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Does the Member wish to move the motion?

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: I would be happy to withdraw the motion in the interests of consensus in the Chamber. The issue is more important than the success of the motion, or any one detail. I beg leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
The sitting was suspended at 1.33 pm.
On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

Office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister
Civic Forum and North/South Consultative Forum

1. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the role to be played by the Civic Forum on the proposed North/South consultative forum.
(AQO1312/01)


On 15 January 2002, we made a statement to the Assembly on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in its institutional format, which took place on 17 December 2001. The Council had agreed that the independent consultative forum, as envisaged in paragraph 19 of strand two of the agreement, should be based on formal interaction between the structures that represent civil society in Northern Ireland and in the South. We are consulting the Civic Forum to ascertain its views on how such interaction might be arranged.


I thank the First Minister for his answer and the emphasis that he placed on the formal nature of the North/South consultative forum. Will he assure me that its establishment will not be delayed by the review of the Civic Forum? Will he also assure me that the Civic Forum will meet with its counterparts south of the border, and that the North/South consultative forum will be established formally at the next North/South Ministerial Council plenary meeting?


We agreed that a formal link should be established between the structures that represent civil society in Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland. The official working group put forward that proposal and is considering recommendations that it hopes to bring forward at the next plenary meeting. The consultation process is focusing on the terms of reference, the composition of the consultative forum, its initial work programme, how it would be chaired and where and when it would meet.
The Civic Forum in Northern Ireland has already submitted some initial views on several of those matters. The official working group is considering those and expects to receive views from the Republic of Ireland shortly. The establishment of the consultative forum is proceeding. I do not wish to use the word "delay", but the outstanding matter is the receipt of the views of the civic partners in the Republic of Ireland.


Does the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister agree that the Civic Forum is a significant disappointment and a waste of time, energy and resources? Can some light be shed on the cancellation of a regional strategy for social inclusion that was to have been launched tomorrow? Was the cancellation due to the fact that the Civic Forum has been unable to agree on the matters that were to have been launched? What was the cost to the Exchequer of the cancellation?


If the Member were fairer in his approach, he would acknowledge that the Civic Forum is remarkably cheap and represents good value for the people of Northern Ireland. It provides a mechanism for aspects of society that are not represented in the Assembly to have a consultative input to socio-economic issues. I know that in the fantasies of some Members in that corner of the Chamber, the Civic Forum is some sort of puppet operated by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. I can assure the Member that that is not the case. I cannot answer his questions in detail because the Civic Forum — and not the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister — is dealing with those matters.


Does the First Minister agree that it would be best to postpone the imminent review of the Civic Forum until the wider review of public administration has been completed?


I understand the point, but we cannot simply wait. It is hoped that we will soon be able to launch the review of public administration, which will be looking at administrative structures rather than at the Civic Forum. Therefore I do not see that there is any necessary interaction between the review of public administration and the continued operation of the Civic Forum.
The Civic Forum will be under review — that is provided for and is understood. We are consulting the Civic Forum about the nature of the review, and I see no reason why the two exercises cannot proceed on their own terms. The question is what will come out of those exercises, and the review of the Civic Forum in particular. I do not wish to express any view about the review of the Civic Forum, as that might lead some persons to think there is some sort of prefiguring of it. We should await the outcome of the review.

Links with Third-World Countries

2. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to outline plans for establishing links with Third-World countries.
(AQO1310/01)


International relations are an excepted matter, and our Department has no plans to establish official or formal links with developing countries. However, although we do not have power in this matter, as a devolved region we do have responsibilities. There is a long tradition of links and a history of support between here and the developing world, which is particularly evident in this Christian Aid week. It is a tradition worthy of all our support.


Does the Minister agree with me that during the darkest days of the troubles, and particularly in the lead-up to the Good Friday Agreement, Northern Ireland received much goodwill, encouragement and, indeed, money from other parts of the world? Does he also agree that now that we have political stability there is an opportunity for us to express a direct interest in the affairs of the Third World, particularly Malawi, which is suffering famine?


I acknowledge the point that the Member has made. Northern Ireland has benefited from significant international attention and goodwill. Now, as we step forward, we should be trying to find ways to help others — not only regions like ourselves that are stepping forward from conflict, but also parts of the world that suffer from long-standing underdevelopment. The ways to do so are not immediately available to us as a devolved region with no formal powers in this matter. However, we can show some lateral thinking. That has already happened in the Assembly in relation to fair trade, and the Assembly has already passed resolutions on the debt issue.
This is appropriate. Too often in Northern Ireland we are good at telling each other that the eyes of the world are upon us. In reality, more often than not the eyes of the world are rolling up to heaven as we yet again create problems for ourselves and try to trap ourselves in the past when we should be showing example by trying to help others.


Will the Minister give details of the efforts that Invest Northern Ireland has made to foster links with developing countries?


The trade division of Invest Northern Ireland, as its name suggests, organises trade missions and related initiatives that link Northern Ireland business with developing countries. In recent years, visits have been made to Argentina, Brazil, China, Kenya, Mexico, Oman, South Africa and Tanzania. Over the next year, it is planned to make trade visits by companies from here to Brazil, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey and Vietnam.

Executive Trips Abroad

3. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to detail the number of trips outside Northern Ireland made on behalf of the Executive in the last six months.
(AQO1306/01)


During the last six months, the Deputy First Minister and I, as First Minister, have represented the Northern Ireland Executive outside Northern Ireland on seven occasions together. In addition, the Deputy First Minister has made seven visits on his own, and I have made 10 during the same period.


With the lack of Executive business, this is a matter of concern. Is the travelling interfering with the work of the Executive and causing the lack of business before the Assembly?


I am satisfied that the joint and individual visits of the Deputy First Minister and me were made for Northern Ireland’s benefit and promotion. They also promoted the good lessons to be drawn from what we have achieved here. They are in stark contrast to the behaviour of the questioner’s Colleagues, particularly in Colombia. Last weekend, their activities caused the death of over 60 people sheltering in a church, as what Colombians described as Irish gas cylinders were discharged at them. I would have thought that the Member might have a little concern about his own moral responsibility for his association with a movement that produced those horrific results.


What benefits have resulted from visits to Brussels and Washington?


They were of a darn sight more benefit than those I last referred to. During our visit to Brussels in January to open our office formally, the Deputy First Minister and I met President Prodi, five EU Commissioners, the President of the European Parliament and several other leading figures. Meetings provided a welcome opportunity to forge good relations with those at the top levels of European Union policy making and helped to ensure that Northern Ireland’s interests were taken into account. Those contacts have been maintained, particularly by junior Ministers who returned to Brussels in April and held several meetings there.
Similarly, we were able to be in Washington for the formal relocation of the Northern Ireland Bureau to its new downtown premises, which are strategically located. This is a significant shift in the operation of the Northern Ireland Bureau, and we hope to see its work further enhanced in the near future.

All-Ireland Approach to European Union Issues

4. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if it plans to develop an all-Ireland approach towards the formulation of a strategy on European Union issues; and to make a statement.
(AQO1315/01)


The North/South Ministerial Council has agreed the establishment of a working group to consider how to advance the Belfast Agreement’s commitment to consideration of the European Union dimension of relevant matters. The working group will identify those EU-related policies, programmes and proposals that might most usefully be discussed by the Council and will also look at the most effective arrangements for developing the role set out in paragraph 17 of strand two.


I thank the Deputy First Minister for his reply, which was much better than the disgraceful reply earlier from the First Minister. Does the Deputy First Minister agree — [Interruption].


Order.


Does the Deputy First Minister agree that Irish citizens, North and South, can only benefit from a closer working relationship with the Dublin Government in the development of a cohesive European policy for the entire island? Does he agree that, particularly in agriculture and other areas, Irish citizens, North and South, can benefit from direct ministerial contact?


I agree with the thrust of the Member’s question. All the people of the island can benefit from North/South co-operation where that is for mutual benefit and the advancement of common issues. That is particularly appropriate in the context of the EU. All the people of this island can also benefit from wider EU co-operation. I wonder whether the thrust of the Member’s question means that he and his Colleagues are now more favourably disposed towards co-operation at a European level as well as at an all-Ireland level?
We can use the North/South Ministerial Council to improve co-operation in sectoral matters. We also must improve our approach to issues of common concern that arise at an EU policy level. That is why we have undertaken the work outlined in my original answer.


In view of the strategic importance to the European Union of stability in the Near and Middle East, does the Deputy First Minister agree that interference in the internal affairs of Turkey by Sinn Féin members does not promote Northern Ireland’s positive participation in the European Union?


Turkey is not actually in the European Union, although it clearly has ambitions in that direction.
We are well outside the brief of the Executive or the Assembly in matters of foreign and security policy. It is beyond my competence to give the answer the Member wants on matters of party political and personal activity in Question Time.


Will the Minister ensure that special attention is given to the common chapter of the European programme and consider how best that can be used to support key cross-border co-operation?


I worked on that in my previous post as Minister of Finance and Personnel. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Department of Finance and Personnel worked with colleagues in the South on improving our performance with the common chapter.
Our present common chapter is not the first chapter. Experience has shown that although the book was good, the movie was never made. This time we are trying to use the facilities of the North/South Ministerial Council and other initiatives to ensure that we meet the goals and aims in the common chapter. We want to ensure that funding support from Europe is used to achieve sensible North/South co-operation and economies of scale in infrastructural development.

Executive Business

5. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on business transacted at the last meeting of the Executive.
(AQO1317/01)


The last meeting of the Executive was held on 9 May. A copy of the press release issued after that meeting has been placed in the Assembly Library.


I am deeply disappointed, but that answer was not unexpected. I have asked that question twice before. The first answer was that Executive business was confidential, and the second answer was that a press release had been placed in the Assembly Library.
We are living in an era where openness and transparency are the order of the day. People need to know what is going on in the Executive on general issues. Will the Minister tell the Assembly what action is taken on House resolutions? Was the water tax debated on 9 May, as reported in last week’s ‘Belfast Telegraph’? Was Lord Ouseley’s report on employment conditions and retirement for the Northern Ireland Civil Service discussed, and, if so, what were the recommendations? If the Executive have nothing to hide, let us hear from them.


I will gently point out to the Member — perhaps he was not in the Chamber then — that last Tuesday we made a detailed statement and answered questions for an hour on the reform and reinvestment initiative, the most significant matter that we have dealt with recently.
The Member must understand that discussions in the Executive are confidential, and press releases are issued about the business transacted. They do not give details of the discussion; that is quite right, and the Member knows that. Important matters are brought to the Assembly; statements are made and questions are answered.
Lord Ouseley’s report on appointments and promotions to the senior Civil Service and allied matters has not yet come to the Executive. When it does, and decisions are taken, a press release will be issued or a statement will be made in the House, if that is considered appropriate.


Would it not be better to bring the business from last Thursday’s Executive meeting to the House rather than make a press statement? The press could find out details from the House. Members whose constituencies were affected should be able to debate matters raised in the press last week.


Mistaken impressions get around. While that question was being asked, I saw a Member flourishing a newspaper headline. It is an erroneous headline. The Member concerned will discover that when the consultation paper, which we think it refers to, is published in the next few weeks. The Member will then discover that having things published through the normal channels is much better than relying on rumour and report.
I am aware that the Member who asked the supplementary question has many serious concerns about events in his constituency. We are trying to focus on those concerns and to make some progress. We are happy to deal with those matters as openly as we can. Procedures exist, through statements and the tabling of private notice questions on matters of urgency, to ensure that there is adequate opportunity for the Assembly to express views on those matters. The type of open questioning afforded by Question Time also provides an opportunity to range widely, and we welcome that.


Before we move to the next question, I remind the House that it is not in order for Members to use any kinds of devices, to wave newspapers or otherwise. I understand that it is in order to wave Order Papers in approbation, but not newspapers.

Community Relations

6. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister how it appraises the benefits of money allocated to community relations.
(AQO1309/01)


The benefits of money allocated to community relations are appraised in three main ways: by attitudinal surveys; by research projects; and by independent evaluations of funded groups. The bulk of community relations funding goes to the Community Relations Council and to support district council community relations programmes. That funding amounts to some £4·5 million of the total allocation of just over £5 million. Both the Community Relations Council and the district council community relations programmes have been subject to independent evaluation in the past 18 months. In both cases, positive conclusions were reached with regard to the impact of their activities and their value for money.


Over the past 10 years, Departments have spent well over £100 million on community relations. All the evidence on the streets shows that community relations are worse. Will the Deputy First Minister confirm that the OFMDFM-commissioned report by Dr Peter Shirlow also expressed that view? Is that why the report has not seen the light of day?


In answer to previous questions, I had to correct Members because of their confusion over two different reports. Dr Shirlow carried out work commissioned by the Belfast European Partnership Board. However, a separate piece of work, relating to other areas and times, was commissioned by OFMDFM. I caution the Member not to confuse the two.
A significant amount of money has been spent on community relations, and a significant amount of work remains to be done. It is a huge problem, and nobody is pretending that all the problems are behind us. We must be cautious about making sweeping judgements that community relations are worse, based on anecdotal evidence, on impressions from particular areas or on studies specific to those areas.


Does the Deputy First Minister agree that there could not be a more graphic demonstration of community relations problems than the recent disorder in north Belfast? Is that not precisely the kind of issue that the Administration’s community relations policy should be tackling?


The situation in north Belfast clearly reveals problems in community relations. However, there are also other problems. That is why the initiative that has been undertaken on behalf of the Executive is looking at various issues. The programmes of several Departments are relevant to the work that is being undertaken in north Belfast. We will continue to work to get on top of the problems in that area. We are reviewing our wider community relations policies to ensure that we are alert to all the problems and that we have responsive policy systems and support mechanisms, particularly in areas where problems are manifested.


Does the Minister concur that the aim of community relations policies in the North is to light candles rather than curse the darkness, and that that approach is required? Will he comment on the events in east Belfast last weekend? As the Deputy First Minister has travelled many roads over the years, will he concur that our society is now more tolerant?


I hope that everyone in the House will join me in expressing concern at the events in east Belfast. We do not want violence in any form, in any location, from any quarter, against any target, be that in north Belfast, east Belfast, east Derry, or anywhere else. We have seen violence in different forms, and I have consistently condemned it all. I hope that everyone in the House will continue to do so.
Although we repudiate and condemn such violence, we should take heart from the fact that new relationships are being built and are growing in this society, and new attitudes are being expressed. People can relate to one another politically, and they can relate to, and with, the shared Administration, albeit at times they may be critical of delivery and the pace of activity. We now have shared political space, and we must find ways to share the streets also.

Programme for Government Targets

7. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what interim assessment it can make of those Programme for Government targets that it anticipates will be met within the agreed timescale.
(AQO1304/01)


The Executive monitor progress on delivering the actions set out in the Programme for Government regularly. The latest available information from the Departments shows that 28% of the 256 actions contained in the Programme for Government for 2001-02 have been achieved. A further 46% were in line for achievement in the published timescales. We are now collating the information, and we plan to report to the Assembly next month. Where progress has been slower than anticipated, our report will identify the reasons for the delay and the remedial action that the Executive intend to take. We are also working to deliver the commitments in the 2002-03 Programme for Government, which was finalised in December 2001. We will continue to monitor progress on all the actions in our first and current Programme for Government.


The Minister is aware of the concern that, because of the modest budget for the Programme for Government, targets will not be met. What action has he initiated to ensure better progress?


I outlined our key action in the lead answer. I emphasise its significance, because we are aware that some of the actions, precise targets and timetables have not been met. In order to deal with those delays, we must identify where and why they happened, and we are publishing information on that. It is worthy of attention, and the Executive ought to be congratulated on that.
We are the first Administration in any jurisdiction that operates a programme for government to publish details of the cases where they failed to achieve targets. Plenty of Governments will publish details of their successes, while trying to cover up difficulties. Many targets were not met because of circumstances beyond our control, but there cannot be an intelligent debate on that or a full appreciation of the difficulties of achieving change unless people can identify and focus on the problems and our actions to overcome them.
We intend to be as open about this matter as possible.


In the light of the Executive’s continuing failure to meet their own targets, does the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister agree that the proposed salary increases for the House are overgenerous? Does it believe that we require greater productivity from the Executive and the House to justify such increases?


It is not appropriate for me to comment on views expressed by the Senior Salaries Review Body or to call into question the actions of the Assembly Commission. Those bodies will take whatever decisions are appropriate. However, the supplementary question was misconceived. It is not appropriate to judge the Assembly’s success on whether the Departments and their officials have met all the targets in the Programme for Government.


I must bring the Minister’s response to a close because we are over the time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.

Regional Development

I wish to inform Members that question 4, in the name of Mr David Ford, has been transferred to the Department of the Environment and will receive a written answer.

Multilingual Signs

1. asked the Minister for Regional Development what plans he has to erect multilingual signs at airports and ferry ports to provide for the safety of foreign visitors.
(AQO1340/01)


The police have not given the Roads Service any indication that there is a road safety problem associated with foreign drivers leaving the country’s airports or ferry ports. Therefore, I have no plans to erect multilingual signs at those facilities.
The provision of signs within ferry ports and airports is a matter for the authorities in those facilities. The majority of drivers visiting Northern Ireland come via airports and ferry ports in Great Britain or by road from the Republic of Ireland, and they will already have experienced the need to drive on the left hand side of the road.


On this occasion I encourage the Minister to think positively and to accept that an increasing number of Europeans, particularly from Germany and France, come directly to Northern Ireland and hire vehicles here. Does he accept that he should consider the road safety aspect, as well as the politeness of recognising the German and French languages, as they do for us?


Visitors are very welcome to Northern Ireland, and many of the road signs here will be part of the general harmonisation of road traffic signs in European countries. Road signs, where possible, include easily recognised symbols or pictograms to convey messages. However, there are significant cost considerations for multilingual signs, and at times they can cause confusion.


Can the Minister guarantee that his Department will not spend millions of pounds unnecessarily on bilingual signs when there are higher priorities in his Department?


The original question was about multilingual signs; bilingual signs take us into a new area, and I assure my hon Friend that I have no intention of spending millions of pounds of much-needed infrastructure funding on bilingual signs.


Following Pat McNamee’s promotion of plain English in last week’s debate on house purchase, is the Minister satisfied with the present signage in English at the Belfast City Airport, where some key signs are very confusing?


For a moment I thought I was going to get a question about McDonald’s restaurant. I am happy to look at the signage at Belfast City Airport. I travel to and from it every week and I have not been confused, but maybe I was not looking at the signs as carefully as I should. I will look at the signs and see if there is any area of confusion.

Roads Infrastructure Around Ballyclare

2. asked the Minister for Regional Development what proposals he is currently considering to improve the roads infrastructure necessary to support (a) present and proposed housing; and (b) industrial development, in Ballyclare and its surrounding villages.
(AQO1331/01)


The regional development strategy for Northern Ireland, which was agreed by the Assembly, identifies Ballyclare as one of the seven towns that will expand to meet the housing need in the Belfast metropolitan area. However, the strategy also recognises that it will be necessary to require developers to bear the costs of infrastructure works required to facilitate their development proposals, and that the promotion of transportation alternatives to the private car will also play a major role.
As regards current and future transport needs, my Department is developing the Belfast metropolitan transport plan, which I hope will be completed by the end of this financial year. It will inform the Belfast metropolitan area plan, which is being developed by the Planning Service. The transport plan will provide a long-term vision for transport in the Belfast metropolitan area, including the Ballyclare area, and it will co-ordinate the implementation of transportation initiatives until 2015.
The lines of two major road schemes in Ballyclare have been protected under the current area plan, which also identifies housing and industrial development in the town. The first scheme is a proposed link road between the Ballynure to Templepatrick road and the Ballyclare to Doagh road, with the purpose of easing congestion at the lower end of Main Street. The second proposed scheme, which will probably be led by developers, will link Doagh Road to Rashee Road. The schemes will be reviewed by the Belfast metropolitan transport plan, but if either is needed to support a development, the developer may have to contribute to it, in full or in part, depending on the outcome of the transport assessment.


Does the Minister share my view that, where supporting road or sewerage infrastructure is not of an acceptable standard, as is the case in the Ballyclare area, his Department should advise the Planning Service to ban housebuilding in the town and surrounding villages until the necessary infrastructure is in place?


I am sure that my Department consults closely with the Planning Service on such issues. I have experience of the conundrum that the Member referred to. In my constituency, significant land was zoned for development, but the necessary infrastructure was not provided until after the houses were built. Timing is an issue; however, if a development results in additional traffic or requires additional water infrastructure, the developer should provide the necessary infrastructure.


Is the Minister aware of an article on the front page of tonight’s ‘Belfast Telegraph’ about the A8, one of the main arterial routes, and will he comment on the story?


I am aware of the inaccurate articles in the ‘Belfast Telegraph’. The headline on the front page states:
"Major road upgrade ‘futile’ claims report."
The report in question claims nothing of the sort. The claim that the upgrade was futile came from the so-called Friends of the Earth. The First Minister referred to inaccurate headlines in the ‘Belfast Telegraph’ — there are two tonight. The headline on page three states:
"Road upgrade ‘is a breach of EU rules’."
The report does not say that either; it says that some might argue that it is a breach of the rules, but it also sets out all the reasons why it is not. The articles contain a highly selective consideration of the report. It is only a draft report, and, when it is available in full, I will be happy to make it available to the Committee for Regional Development.


I heard several Members remark, sotto voce, about newspapers in the Chamber. I refer the House to the advice on Chamber etiquette in Standing Orders:
"Newspapers should not be brought into the Chamber except for quotation."
and
"Newspapers should not be brought into, or read in, the Chamber, except for brief quotations in the context of a speech."
On this occasion the bringing in of newspapers was in order, as they were quoted from briefly — although I remember other occasions on which that was not the case.

Reliability of Parking Meters

3. asked the Minister for Regional Development if he has any plans to improve the reliability of parking meters in Belfast.
(AQO1336/01)


Pay-and-display parking machines, which were introduced in Belfast in 1987, have come to the end of their useful economic lives.
The Roads Service is installing new machines in the city centre. To date, some 110 new machines are in place, and a further 50 will be provided by the end of the summer. Each machine has a communications link to a central parking office. That enables the machine to report any faults automatically, thus allowing necessary repairs or maintenance work to be carried out as quickly as possible.


I thank the Minister for his response. I noticed in the media at the end of last week an indication that Northern Ireland is at the cutting edge of technology, with the introduction of new parking meters. Could the Minister outline the benefits that will result following this introduction of new technology?


Northern Ireland is taking a lead, not only in the United Kingdom but much further afield. Many vandalised or broken parking meters remain out of operation for a long time, and revenue to the Northern Ireland block is lost. The scheme uses SIM (subscriber identity module) card technology — as do the mobile phones that are occasionally heard ringing in the Chamber — so that the central office knows automatically when payments are made at a machine. As a result, only small sums of money are ever left in a parking meter, because it can be emptied when required. That removes the incentive to break into it. It also helps the Department to plan its collection of money. In addition, the machines accept credit cards, and therefore they will contain less money anyway.


The Minister recently said that he intended to decriminalise parking offences in Belfast and to civilianise the enforcement of parking regulations. What discussions has he had with his counterparts in Great Britain about their experiences of wheel-clamping in urban areas?


That is not a matter of choice for the Department, because the police have indicated their eagerness to give up their role as regards parking. Some might argue that they gave it up some time ago. Parking offences must be dealt with, so the Department will become responsible for the matter. Legislation will have to be passed by the Assembly. The Department has discussed the issue with the police, and departmental officials are talking to authorities elsewhere in the United Kingdom about their experiences. Northern Ireland is the only region of the United Kingdom that has not already decriminalised parking offences.

Walking Strategy

5. asked the Minister for Regional Development, in relation to the draft walking strategy, to outline (a) the targets he is proposing for the promotion of the activity of walking; and (b) the measures that are being put in place to ensure that those targets are achieved.
(AQO1328/01)


The Department’s draft walking strategy is still at a preparatory stage. However, consideration is being given to the setting of targets in the draft strategy, aimed at increasing the number of short walking journeys — that is to say, those of less than one mile — and the average distance walked annually by each person. Consideration is also being given to the inclusion of targets linked to the Department’s regional transportation strategy as regards the provision of infrastructure and the promotion of walking. It is proposed that the draft strategy will contain around 80 "planned actions"; those are a series of initiatives and practical measures that will contribute to the achievement of targets and will be assigned to key stakeholders with the aim of delivering improvements for pedestrians. The "planned actions" fall under the headings of design, planning, safety, improving existing routes, walking for health, walking for leisure, tourism and marketing. The Department hopes to publish the strategy later this year.


I thank the Minister for his detailed answer. It is an important subject, especially for those who wish to start walking to work, and for schoolchildren. ‘Investing for Health’, published in November 2000, and with targets for April 2001, contains the Department for Regional Development’s commitments as regards support and investment in health. When does the Minister envisage that those targets will be met?


I am delighted that Sinn Féin has a walking strategy. I hope that Orangemen in various parts of the Province will gain from the additional miles that they will be able to walk as part of that strategy.
The regional transportation strategy is expected to come to the Assembly before the summer recess, and the Northern Ireland walking strategy will be published later this year. Those two documents will consider the walking strategy and any targets that might be relevant to it.


I am glad that the Minister has noted the change in Sinn Féin’s attitude towards walking. It is nice to see that there has been a change of heart, and that Sinn Féin now wishes to promote walking in Northern Ireland.
Given that much traffic congestion, especially in cities, occurs at the start and finish of the school day, what plans does the Minister have for safer walking routes to schools so that schoolchildren can avail of that option as opposed to having to use either public or private transport?


That issue was discussed with officials and interest groups within the past few days. Due to the lengthy period of civil disturbance, many people thought it was safer to leave their children to school by car, even for very short journeys. The community needs to feel confident that the troubles are behind us. Until there is clear evidence of that, it will be hard to convince some people that they should choose walking as an alternative to taking their children to school by car.
Traffic-calming measures are an incentive for walking. The regional transportation strategy envisages a significant increase in the number of traffic-calming schemes, which would reduce the danger for people walking.

Dual Carriageways in Tyrone and Fermanagh

6. asked the Minister for Regional Development to detail the number of dual carriageway miles in Counties Tyrone and Fermanagh; and to make a statement.
(AQO1339/01)


There are 7·9 miles of motorway and 1·7 miles of dual carriageway in Counties Tyrone and Fermanagh. The majority of trunk roads in those counties are single-carriageway roads, which can cope adequately with the volume of traffic on those routes.


Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the fact that the Minister and Sammy Wilson referred to Sinn Féin by its correct title, without any appendage, in the previous answer, and I thank them.
The Minister will appreciate that Tyrone and Fermanagh depend heavily on roads infrastructure, because there is no rail network. The figures of 7·9 miles of motorway and 1·7 miles of dual carriageway speak for themselves and show historic underinvestment. Can the Minister deliver a real commitment to increasing the number of dual carriageway and motorway miles in Tyrone and Fermanagh? A good start would be the roads from Dungannon to Ballygawley, Ballygawley to Omagh and Omagh to Strabane on the major arterial route, the A5, which carries much cross-border traffic.


One of the first council visits that I made as Minister was to Fermanagh District Council. As someone who represents the east of the Province, I was struck by the feelings of councillors from all parties who were present that the area had been given a very raw deal because money for roads went to where the traffic was heaviest, which is largely in the east of the Province. I said that it was necessary for us to examine the criteria under which we operate and to consider whether those criteria were fair, because funding based on those criteria could mean that there might never be new roads to the west of the Province.
Arising from the draft regional transportation strategy, I tasked my officials with reconsidering how we could start to provide stepped improvements. They will consider issues of affordability, priority and innovative procurement mechanisms with the regional transportation strategy team. In that context, issues such as the road between Dungannon and Ballygawley, which would be the outworking of such a policy, will be examined. I am seeking to do something more innovative than that which was laid out in the draft regional transportation strategy, and when the strategy is put before the Assembly, Members will see that the tweaking has made some difference.


Will the Minister indicate to the House — particularly for the benefit of the IRA/Sinn Féin Member for West Tyrone — whether criteria exist for the construction of dual carriageways and motorways in Northern Ireland?


The manual indicates that, in general, a dual carriageway may be viable where more than 11,000 vehicles per day use a road: a similar volume of traffic applies when the viability of a motorway is being considered. The type of traffic and the extent to which the volume per day exceeds that figure must be examined. The availability of finance to carry out the work is also a factor.
The regional transport strategy will become a central element, and should the Assembly accept the strategy, it will envisage a significant increase in the amount of money available for roads and public transport schemes in Northern Ireland. Only by adopting such a scheme will we be able to meet the expectations of many district councillors and MLAs.


The Minister is well aware of my view — through the Committee for Regional Development and the Chamber — that key regional transportation corridors should be dual carriageways. However, I understand the financial constraints.
Furthermore, the Minister will understand that the north-western and eastern areas of Northern Ireland have rail services, whereas the south-west does not. In rural areas, the nature of the vehicles involved is a major factor affecting average journey times. In that context, is the Minister considering the extension of the motorway to Ballygawley, or at least to the edge of West Tyrone? None of the 8·4 miles of motorway or dual carriageway mentioned are in that area.


It is very easy to look at the road infrastructure on a map of Northern Ireland and see where significant improvements could be made. The guiding principle in the regional transportation strategy is that proposals must be earthed in reality: we must be capable of delivering them and, essentially, that means that the funding for schemes must be available.
I agree that strategic road corridors must be investigated first: many of them feed into the west of the Province. Improvements can be made — in some cases that will involve dual carriageways; in other cases different improvements can help. We must pay most attention to strategic road corridors. That principle was enunciated in the regional development strategy, which was the mother document of the regional transportation strategy.

Water Leakage

7. asked the Minister for Regional Development what measures he is taking to address the level of leakage in Northern Ireland’s water supply system.
(AQO1329/01)


The Water Service has a strategy in place to identify, manage and control leakage in the water distribution system. The main elements are the installation and monitoring of district meters, pressure management schemes and leak detection and repair. Over the past four years, £22 million has been invested in leakage reduction measures. Approximately half of that was invested in setting up the essential leakage management infrastructure, including district meters and telemetry.
A further £25 million will be invested over the next four years. As the leakage infrastructure is well advanced, 80% of that expenditure will go directly to detecting and repairing leaks. The aim is to achieve the economic level of leakage by 2006.


Does the Minister concede that water leakage of 37% is unacceptable and costly? Given that the water resource strategy identified serious supply difficulties in the western area in 2000, with demand exceeding supply by six million litres a day, what action is the Department taking to address the infrastructure difficulties that are especially relevant to Counties Tyrone and Fermanagh, and the western half of County Derry?


The level of leakage is unacceptable, and that is why the Department has allocated increased funding. The leakage is the result of the ageing infrastructure, which is the legacy of years of neglect under direct rule. Nonetheless, we must make changes through leakage detection and remedial action to improve the infrastructure. Other changes will result from the water resource strategy, which the Department has submitted to the Committee for Regional Development. I hope to introduce that strategy to the Assembly soon by way of a take-note debate. As part of the water resource strategy, the Department will consider the issues, such as how it can meet any deficits between existing water supply and usage, to which Mr Byrne referred.


Will the Minister clarify what the leakage figure is? Mr Byrne quoted a figure of 37%, but I understood it to be more in the region of 33%. Does the figure change between night-time and daytime? Does the level of leakage reduce when the system is used more during the day? What proposals does the Minister have to fill the funding gap that will be left by improving the infrastructure?


It is difficult to be precise about the percentage figure. The Department does not dare to refer to the lost water as leakage, although that is the common parlance. It is known as "unaccounted-for water", and it is unaccounted for because no domestic metering takes place. Given that the Department knows how much water leaves the reservoirs, but does not know how much is used by domestic consumers, assessments are made. Whether the figure is 33% or 37% — I have even heard it estimated at 40% — is a matter of conjecture. However, the level is unacceptable and the problem must be addressed.
The new telemetry will allow the Department to more accurately assess the areas in which leakage occurs, the amount of leakage and the time of day at which it takes place. I hope to be in a better position to answer the more detailed questions at a later stage.
Mr Byrne managed to ask several questions. To answer his final one, the Department estimates that £3 billion will be needed over the next 20 years for infrastructural requirements for water and sewerage services. A similar amount will be required for roads and transportation. Therefore, there are significant infrastructural requirements, and the Assembly can make a good start towards addressing those by ceasing to spend up to £150 million a year on bureaucratic extravagance. Instead, that amount could be used to service a loan of around £2 billion that could really help water and road services.


I congratulate the Minister on his in-depth knowledge of leaks. After the publication of the Public Accounts Committee’s report, has he reviewed his target of an anticipated reduction in water leakage of between 3% and 7% to the more challenging figure of 15%?


I regret to say that the time is up. I shall have to ask the Minister to reply in writing to the Member.

Environment

I wish to inform Members that question 1, standing in the name of Mr Arthur Doherty, has been transferred to the Minister for Regional Development and will receive a written answer. Question 9, standing in the name of Mrs Annie Courtney, has been transferred to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and will also receive a written answer.

Checking of Planning Applications

2. asked the Minister of the Environment what steps are being taken to ensure that information supplied by applicants when seeking planning permission is genuine and correct.
(AQO1346/01)


It is in the interests of applicants and the public to have the correct details when submitting a planning application; any inaccuracies may lead to delays in processing the application. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that accurate information on the four key areas is supplied, namely: the address of the application site; the description of the proposal; the completion of the P2 certificate regarding legal interest in the application site; and the details of notifiable neighbours. To assist in the correct completion of application forms, explanatory notes on applying for planning permission and notes for completing the main application form, P1, are supplied with an application pack. Further advice and assistance are also available from staff in the divisional planning office.
To further ensure the correctness of the information in the application form, the Planning Service carries out an initial validation to confirm that the forms have been completed properly and the correct fee submitted. Further checks on the information’s accuracy are made during the planning officer’s visit to the site. Representations made by third parties may also raise discrepancies in the applicant’s information. If the information on the application form has to be revised in the interests of accuracy, it will be re-advertised in the press, and neighbours will be renotified.
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr J Wilson] in the Chair)


In cases where inaccurate information has been furnished to the Department of the Environment, how determined is the Department to correct those inaccuracies? Are there sufficient enforcement staff in the Department to ensure that everyone gets a fair deal?


I will answer the second point first. The Assembly knows that the Department of the Environment has been viewed as somewhat of a Cinderella — funds have not been given to it in the past. However, additional funds have been supplied, there are more Planning Service officials in place, and, we trust, any shortfall has been improved. That is not to say that there is complacency or that we do not need more staff — quite the reverse. More staff may be needed. Indeed, we are looking at the whole process.
The Department of the Environment is determined to correct inaccuracies. All addresses and descriptions of applications are checked for accuracy when they go in the press. As well as that, all the neighbour notification names must be inserted, and if they are not, there will be delays. The forms must be accurate. Last week, a seminar on planning matters was conducted with the construction industry at which the results of a survey carried out by a private consultancy firm were discussed. One of the points that the survey mentioned was that the process was slow because accuracy had to be checked.
Therefore I remain convinced that the Department should insist on accuracy, and that inaccuracies cause delays.


When an applicant states that he owns a property, and the accuracy of that claim is challenged by the legal adviser of a neighbour, is it proper for the Department not only to consider and process, but to determine and approve an application for that ground?


Land ownership is important, but the term "legal interest" is more appropriate. Applicants must complete properly a P2 form where they must state their legal interest in the land. An applicant may or may not own the land, but he must declare that information. We do not check the accuracy of every form, but third parties have the opportunity to challenge applications, because they are publicly advertised. We endeavour to confirm the accuracy of the forms, but discrepancies and inaccuracies cause delays.


Is the information contained in objections to planning applications also checked and validated?


All elements are checked and validated, and, more generally, all elements are considered in determining planning applications. That applies across the spectrum of people who are officially consulted. The information provided during the planning process is validated, whether it be for an application or an objection to an application.

Protected Habitats and Unique Biological Communities

3. asked the Minister of the Environment to make a statement on the threat to protected habitats and unique biological communities.
(AQO1350/01)


A Northern Ireland countryside survey published by the Department of the Environment in November 2000 sets out the main changes in the countryside over a 10-year period up until 1998. It identified a loss of species-rich grassland and wetland habitats as one of the main trends during that time.
Using data from the survey, my Department’s Environment and Heritage Service is developing several biodiversity action plans for important habitats and vulnerable species in Northern Ireland. The main means of protecting habitats and biological communities, as well as sites that are important for earth science conservation, is the declaration of Areas of Special Scientific Interest (ASSIs), under the Nature Conservation and Amenity Lands (Northern Ireland) Order 1985.
To date, the Department of the Environment has declared 196 ASSIs. Although most sites have remained in good condition following their declaration, there is evidence that some sites or parts of sites have been damaged, while others have deteriorated through neglect or inappropriate management. Weakness in the legislation has contributed to this situation. Following public consultation, the Department of the Environment has therefore been developing proposals to strengthen the legislation governing the protection and management of ASSIs. I recently circulated the proposals in the Executive, with a view to bringing a Bill before the Assembly in the next session.


Is the Minister satisfied with the level of cross-departmental co-operation aimed at providing the necessary resources to ensure protection — for example, farmers who may have difficulty in affording infrastructure on their farms? Also, will the Minister comment on the level of threat to protected habitats from other Government Departments?


There are two elements in a cross-departmental aspect to farming. One is the farmers, and the other is the cross-departmental nature. There is cross-departmental co-operation, and I referred to this previously when I talked about working with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Bríd Rodgers. We have written and oral contact about what needs to be done, and when I had discussions with the Ulster Farmers’ Union, Ms Rodgers and I apprised each other.
With respect to the farming community, I am conscious that this aspect needs to be fostered. From the point of ownership of the land, 4,500 farmers or developers are responsible for the ASSIs they occupy, and we need their co-operation to manage ASSIs effectively. In bringing forward these proposals, we are trying to bring a balance in greater regulation and trying to get help in managing the ASSIs better. I am aware that farmers will be financially compensated for managing ASSIs. We must satisfy a Programme for Government commitment, which is to have a policy and a legislative framework for protecting and managing areas in place by July 2003.
We are always mindful of what other Government Departments do. I have mentioned the example of the Department of Agriculture and co-operation with it.


Will the Minister detail what action he is planning to take in response to the report of the Northern Ireland Biodiversity Group?


The Northern Ireland Biodiversity Group presented its report in October 2000 and made 76 recommendations for biodiversity conservation up to and including the year 2016. Other Departments are discussing this document — and therein is a further answer to the last question — and we anticipate publishing the final document in June. We are not complacent, and action is already under way in the Department with respect to the Irish hare and the curlew, because they are rare species. There will also be the implementation of an action plan by the Department between 2002 and 2005 on those recommendations that fall within its remit. We are responding, and we are dealing with other Departments as well.


What provision is there in the present system for landowners or farmers who wish to construct a building or a house to ensure the long-term viability of a farm holding that could be subject to protective habitats and unique biological communities?


The farming sector is important, and it is important for the management of protected landscapes and areas of special scientific interest that farmers agree with what we wish to do. The aspects raised by Mr Shannon are discussed as and when they arise. However, for the third time in answer to this question, I stress that I recognise the importance of the farming community and the contribution it makes to the agrifood industry in Northern Ireland and to the protection of ASSIs.
There are currently 196, but it is anticipated that a further 200 may be needed when the review is complete. We will need the agriculture industry to work with us and complement our work to protect agriculture and areas of special scientific interest.

Planning Issues in North Down

4. asked the Minister of the Environment what assessment he has made in relation to the areas he visited and planning issues he discussed during his private ministerial visit to North Down on Friday 26 April 2002; and to make a statement.
(AQO1356/01)


My visit to north Down on Friday 26 April 2002 formed part of my ministerial duties. Its purpose was to hear at first hand the concerns of representatives of local conservation and residents’ groups about the Planning Service’s decisions on residential developments in Bangor, Holywood, Helen’s Bay and Donaghadee. The issues discussed related to concerns about loss of character in high-quality residential areas; the increase in apartment development; unsuccessful enforcement action; and a request for conservation area status from one group. The visit was helpful in highlighting the areas of concern, and I will pursue these in the normal manner.


I thank the Minister for his informative reply. It was interesting because other constituency Members have been working on all those areas for years. The information gained from that visit and from the Minister’s answer will be worthwhile for all of us.
Will the Minister explain the difference between a ministerial visit and a private ministerial visit? Is the inclusion of publicity a factor, and what protocols apply to that? If that were clear, perhaps interested MLAs from the same area — other than those from the Minister’s own party — might also attend. [Interruption]. That is true.


That is out of order.


It is not out of order.


I am glad that Mrs Bell has clarified what is probably the true reason for asking the question. Other constituency Members have been working for years on the points that I have been dealing with. There is nothing unusual about that.
Mrs Bell asked about the difference between a ministerial visit and a private ministerial visit. I note that she used the word "private", not I. I keep apprised of what happens in the media. One of the papers said that it was an informal visit. Let me put it clearly on the record: I was accompanied at the meeting by my private secretary and by the planning officer for that area. I have met delegations in my office before — some from one party, some from several parties — and I have dealt with specific issues in a specific area. On none of those occasions were all Members present nor all parties represented. Not only —[Interruption].


Order.


It is all right, Mr Deputy Speaker; I am a tolerant person. I assure the Member that this is not the first time that I have met a delegation on site, nor will it be the last. I go where I can as time permits. I prefer to describe it as an on-site office meeting.
Let me also stress that I will not tolerate the use or abuse of my ministerial position by any MLA. I have written to one MLA and made clear to him the impact of the statement that he issued.
I walk a tight line; I must be fully cognisant of the circumstances before I reach any decision.
Therefore I must decide when, where or how I gather that information. I am satisfied with what I did. I resent the comment that I was dealing differently with a Member from my party. That was not the case.


I wish to find out more about that meeting. I would appreciate information on the visits to Bangor, Holywood, Helen’s Bay and Donaghadee. The Minister has given us some details; I want more specific information.
It is interesting that the Minister was information-gathering in order to make a decision. The request for conservation area status for Holywood is valuable for the group. Has the Minister made a decision on that, and if not, when will it be made? Did any other action points emerge from the visit?


Round two, Mr Deputy Speaker.
I may or may not have been information-gathering to make a decision. I said that I was gathering information for when I may make a decision. I was dealing with officials and issues on a site visit.
Ms Morrice asked about conservation areas, and they are important. All settlements in Northern Ireland have their own identity. I was in Holywood, which has its identity. I have visited Hillsborough, which has its identity. I have been to other places that have their identities. Each place has its own distinctive characteristic, which could be based on its architecture, history or layout. We must form an opinion, and if the buildings are listed buildings, they are likely to become conservation areas.
Others areas that would require a certain level of protection would become areas of townscape character. We must bear those important considerations in mind.
There is also the issue of apartments that are being built in towns. The planning process dictates that 60% of dwellings have to be built in towns. We apply a mixture of general principles to particular circumstances.


As someone who, along with other Assembly Members, was not invited to the meeting, I would be interested to find out more information on the concerns raised, and what the Minister intends to do about them.
What plans has the Minister to give teeth to the concept of townscape character? A major concern in north Down and elsewhere has been that his Department has issued stop notices and enforcement notices, but has not followed them up with court action when they have been ignored. What plans has he to reverse the previous practice of not enforcing those notices and to take the developers to court as an example to others?


The record may show, or Mr Weir may clarify, that he said that he was not invited to the meeting. How many times must I say that the meeting I held was similar to other meetings that I hold, in that a Member makes a request about an issue and attends along with other people? That could mean a Member from any party. That was not the only time I was on site, and it was with a Member who did not belong to the Ulster Unionist Party.
I do not like Mr Weir’s innuendo that he was not invited to the meeting.


It is a statement of fact.


I note that it is a statement of fact. When I have a meeting dealing with planning applications, a general invitation does not go out to all MLAs in whose constituency the area concerned is. That is protocol, and that is what happens.
On the Member’s second point about enforcement, we are bringing forward the planning (amendment) Bill, which will have enforcement powers. I wish to see stronger enforcement powers. I want those powers to be implemented for the benefit of all, so that no one in Northern Ireland will be under the illusion that planning can be flouted in a cavalier way.

Apartment Developments in South Belfast

5. asked the Minister of the Environment whether he has any plans to restrict the opportunity for apartment development on the sites of family homes in South Belfast; and to make a statement.
(AQO1357/01)


I am aware of concerns about the growth of apartment developments on such sites in south Belfast. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the demand for small unit housing, including apartments. My Department has been seeking to clarify the planning policy context for dealing with those proposals.
The Member will be aware that the regional development strategy seeks to promote more sustainable forms of development through a two-pronged approach of encouraging compact urban forms and promoting more housing in existing urban areas. New residential development can, however, threaten local character and identity. The strategy also requires that densification should be achieved without town cramming — the forcing of overdeveloped and unsympathetic housing schemes into established residential areas.
Planning policy for housing is set out in my Department’s Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7) ‘Quality Residential Environments’. That statement requires developers to provide high-quality housing proposals on both brownfield and greenfield sites that are sympathetic to the character of an area, in order to avoid a level of intensification that can adversely affect local townscape character and identity. Sensitive judgements are required so that the correct balance is achieved between ensuring that proposals are sympathetic to their context, and have respect for local amenities, and seeking to achieve the target in the regional development strategy of increasing housing provision in existing urban areas.
Particular sensitivity is required in the primarily residential parts of conservation areas, and in areas of townscape character, where planning policy is to grant proposals involving intensification of site usage only in exceptional circumstances. PPS 7 also points out that the demolition of property will not create a presumption that permission for far more intensive and high-density development will be granted.
My Department has also issued draft supplementary planning guidance in the form of Development Control Advice Note 8, ‘Small Unit Housing. New Development in Existing Residential Areas’, which it intends to publish in final form in the near future. That document provides more detailed guidance on proposals for small unit housing in existing urban areas. Although it does not set policy, it gives guidance to developers on the physical form of housing development, including apartments, and on the relationship with surrounding properties.


I thank the Minister for his lengthy statement; it certainly clarifies many matters. Does he agree that the conservation area announced last year by his predecessor, Sam Foster, does not seem to have stopped the rot? The announcement of a conservation area in such a large area of south Belfast was very welcome. However, developments — and the threat of large developments — are still taking place.
Only last week, there was publicity surrounding a house in Ashley Avenue that was previously occupied by the poet Séamus Heaney. That house appears to have been left to rot and decay to the point where it will be demolished and replaced by an unsuitable block of flats. I am sure that the Minister has seen many of the sites in south Belfast, but I would be glad to invite him to inspect that site, either with or without my being present. There is a major issue to be resolved, as was highlighted by the case of Séamus Heaney’s former house in Ashley Avenue last week.


Minister, you have less than a minute to respond.


I smile about the invitation to come to south Belfast. As and when my diary permits, I can and do make visits.
I am visiting a constituency on a different matter with someone from the Member’s party. That is how life is in politics. The loss of built heritage in the Malone area has escalated, and the Government designated it a conservation area in 2000. Therefore, express consent must be given for the demolition of any building, and new development must comply with PPS 6, which protects the character of conservation areas. That has been the Department’s response.


On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Minister has achieved a new record for the least number of questions answered: he got to the fourth question. Will some direction be given to Ministers so that we get more answers and less waffle?


I have noted that we managed to deal with only four questions, which is somewhat unfair to those coming behind. I will return to the issue, and I will examine Hansard to see if I was guilty in any way of prolonging the questions and answers, but I do not think that I was. Four questions was not very good.


On a further point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I refer to the operational advice notes in the Standing Orders handbook. I have placed two questions for written answer — AQW 2344/01 and AQW2345/01 — to the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Following numerous telephone calls, faxes and promises, I still do not have answers to those questions, which are now two months overdue. According to the handbook, questions should be tabled "ten clear working days" before they are due for answer. How can I get answers to my constituents’ concerns?


That is not a point of order. It is a matter for the Executive, and I am sure that they have heard your concerns and complaint.


Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like Members to be aware that the Committee for Procedures and the Business Committee are examining the issue of questions, and they have requested input from Members.
Motion made:
That the Assembly do now adjourn. — [Mr Deputy Speaker.]

Office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister

Civic Forum and North/South Consultative Forum

Mr Eamonn ONeill: 1. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the role to be played by the Civic Forum on the proposed North/South consultative forum.
(AQO1312/01)

Rt Hon David Trimble: On 15 January 2002, we made a statement to the Assembly on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in its institutional format, which took place on 17 December 2001. The Council had agreed that the independent consultative forum, as envisaged in paragraph 19 of strand two of the agreement, should be based on formal interaction between the structures that represent civil society in Northern Ireland and in the South. We are consulting the Civic Forum to ascertain its views on how such interaction might be arranged.

Mr Eamonn ONeill: I thank the First Minister for his answer and the emphasis that he placed on the formal nature of the North/South consultative forum. Will he assure me that its establishment will not be delayed by the review of the Civic Forum? Will he also assure me that the Civic Forum will meet with its counterparts south of the border, and that the North/South consultative forum will be established formally at the next North/South Ministerial Council plenary meeting?

Rt Hon David Trimble: We agreed that a formal link should be established between the structures that represent civil society in Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland. The official working group put forward that proposal and is considering recommendations that it hopes to bring forward at the next plenary meeting. The consultation process is focusing on the terms of reference, the composition of the consultative forum, its initial work programme, how it would be chaired and where and when it would meet.
The Civic Forum in Northern Ireland has already submitted some initial views on several of those matters. The official working group is considering those and expects to receive views from the Republic of Ireland shortly. The establishment of the consultative forum is proceeding. I do not wish to use the word "delay", but the outstanding matter is the receipt of the views of the civic partners in the Republic of Ireland.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Does the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister agree that the Civic Forum is a significant disappointment and a waste of time, energy and resources? Can some light be shed on the cancellation of a regional strategy for social inclusion that was to have been launched tomorrow? Was the cancellation due to the fact that the Civic Forum has been unable to agree on the matters that were to have been launched? What was the cost to the Exchequer of the cancellation?

Rt Hon David Trimble: If the Member were fairer in his approach, he would acknowledge that the Civic Forum is remarkably cheap and represents good value for the people of Northern Ireland. It provides a mechanism for aspects of society that are not represented in the Assembly to have a consultative input to socio-economic issues. I know that in the fantasies of some Members in that corner of the Chamber, the Civic Forum is some sort of puppet operated by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. I can assure the Member that that is not the case. I cannot answer his questions in detail because the Civic Forum — and not the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister — is dealing with those matters.

Mr Duncan Dalton: Does the First Minister agree that it would be best to postpone the imminent review of the Civic Forum until the wider review of public administration has been completed?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I understand the point, but we cannot simply wait. It is hoped that we will soon be able to launch the review of public administration, which will be looking at administrative structures rather than at the Civic Forum. Therefore I do not see that there is any necessary interaction between the review of public administration and the continued operation of the Civic Forum.
The Civic Forum will be under review — that is provided for and is understood. We are consulting the Civic Forum about the nature of the review, and I see no reason why the two exercises cannot proceed on their own terms. The question is what will come out of those exercises, and the review of the Civic Forum in particular. I do not wish to express any view about the review of the Civic Forum, as that might lead some persons to think there is some sort of prefiguring of it. We should await the outcome of the review.

Links with Third-World Countries

Mr John Dallat: 2. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to outline plans for establishing links with Third-World countries.
(AQO1310/01)

Mr Mark Durkan: International relations are an excepted matter, and our Department has no plans to establish official or formal links with developing countries. However, although we do not have power in this matter, as a devolved region we do have responsibilities. There is a long tradition of links and a history of support between here and the developing world, which is particularly evident in this Christian Aid week. It is a tradition worthy of all our support.

Mr John Dallat: Does the Minister agree with me that during the darkest days of the troubles, and particularly in the lead-up to the Good Friday Agreement, Northern Ireland received much goodwill, encouragement and, indeed, money from other parts of the world? Does he also agree that now that we have political stability there is an opportunity for us to express a direct interest in the affairs of the Third World, particularly Malawi, which is suffering famine?

Mr Mark Durkan: I acknowledge the point that the Member has made. Northern Ireland has benefited from significant international attention and goodwill. Now, as we step forward, we should be trying to find ways to help others — not only regions like ourselves that are stepping forward from conflict, but also parts of the world that suffer from long-standing underdevelopment. The ways to do so are not immediately available to us as a devolved region with no formal powers in this matter. However, we can show some lateral thinking. That has already happened in the Assembly in relation to fair trade, and the Assembly has already passed resolutions on the debt issue.
This is appropriate. Too often in Northern Ireland we are good at telling each other that the eyes of the world are upon us. In reality, more often than not the eyes of the world are rolling up to heaven as we yet again create problems for ourselves and try to trap ourselves in the past when we should be showing example by trying to help others.

Mr David McClarty: Will the Minister give details of the efforts that Invest Northern Ireland has made to foster links with developing countries?

Mr Mark Durkan: The trade division of Invest Northern Ireland, as its name suggests, organises trade missions and related initiatives that link Northern Ireland business with developing countries. In recent years, visits have been made to Argentina, Brazil, China, Kenya, Mexico, Oman, South Africa and Tanzania. Over the next year, it is planned to make trade visits by companies from here to Brazil, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey and Vietnam.

Executive Trips Abroad

Mr John Kelly: 3. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to detail the number of trips outside Northern Ireland made on behalf of the Executive in the last six months.
(AQO1306/01)

Rt Hon David Trimble: During the last six months, the Deputy First Minister and I, as First Minister, have represented the Northern Ireland Executive outside Northern Ireland on seven occasions together. In addition, the Deputy First Minister has made seven visits on his own, and I have made 10 during the same period.

Mr John Kelly: With the lack of Executive business, this is a matter of concern. Is the travelling interfering with the work of the Executive and causing the lack of business before the Assembly?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I am satisfied that the joint and individual visits of the Deputy First Minister and me were made for Northern Ireland’s benefit and promotion. They also promoted the good lessons to be drawn from what we have achieved here. They are in stark contrast to the behaviour of the questioner’s Colleagues, particularly in Colombia. Last weekend, their activities caused the death of over 60 people sheltering in a church, as what Colombians described as Irish gas cylinders were discharged at them. I would have thought that the Member might have a little concern about his own moral responsibility for his association with a movement that produced those horrific results.

Dr Joe Hendron: What benefits have resulted from visits to Brussels and Washington?

Rt Hon David Trimble: They were of a darn sight more benefit than those I last referred to. During our visit to Brussels in January to open our office formally, the Deputy First Minister and I met President Prodi, five EU Commissioners, the President of the European Parliament and several other leading figures. Meetings provided a welcome opportunity to forge good relations with those at the top levels of European Union policy making and helped to ensure that Northern Ireland’s interests were taken into account. Those contacts have been maintained, particularly by junior Ministers who returned to Brussels in April and held several meetings there.
Similarly, we were able to be in Washington for the formal relocation of the Northern Ireland Bureau to its new downtown premises, which are strategically located. This is a significant shift in the operation of the Northern Ireland Bureau, and we hope to see its work further enhanced in the near future.

All-Ireland Approach to European Union Issues

Mr Barry McElduff: 4. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if it plans to develop an all-Ireland approach towards the formulation of a strategy on European Union issues; and to make a statement.
(AQO1315/01)

Mr Mark Durkan: The North/South Ministerial Council has agreed the establishment of a working group to consider how to advance the Belfast Agreement’s commitment to consideration of the European Union dimension of relevant matters. The working group will identify those EU-related policies, programmes and proposals that might most usefully be discussed by the Council and will also look at the most effective arrangements for developing the role set out in paragraph 17 of strand two.

Mr Barry McElduff: I thank the Deputy First Minister for his reply, which was much better than the disgraceful reply earlier from the First Minister. Does the Deputy First Minister agree — [Interruption].

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Barry McElduff: Does the Deputy First Minister agree that Irish citizens, North and South, can only benefit from a closer working relationship with the Dublin Government in the development of a cohesive European policy for the entire island? Does he agree that, particularly in agriculture and other areas, Irish citizens, North and South, can benefit from direct ministerial contact?

Mr Mark Durkan: I agree with the thrust of the Member’s question. All the people of the island can benefit from North/South co-operation where that is for mutual benefit and the advancement of common issues. That is particularly appropriate in the context of the EU. All the people of this island can also benefit from wider EU co-operation. I wonder whether the thrust of the Member’s question means that he and his Colleagues are now more favourably disposed towards co-operation at a European level as well as at an all-Ireland level?
We can use the North/South Ministerial Council to improve co-operation in sectoral matters. We also must improve our approach to issues of common concern that arise at an EU policy level. That is why we have undertaken the work outlined in my original answer.

Dr Ian Adamson: In view of the strategic importance to the European Union of stability in the Near and Middle East, does the Deputy First Minister agree that interference in the internal affairs of Turkey by Sinn Féin members does not promote Northern Ireland’s positive participation in the European Union?

Mr Mark Durkan: Turkey is not actually in the European Union, although it clearly has ambitions in that direction.
We are well outside the brief of the Executive or the Assembly in matters of foreign and security policy. It is beyond my competence to give the answer the Member wants on matters of party political and personal activity in Question Time.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Will the Minister ensure that special attention is given to the common chapter of the European programme and consider how best that can be used to support key cross-border co-operation?

Mr Mark Durkan: I worked on that in my previous post as Minister of Finance and Personnel. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Department of Finance and Personnel worked with colleagues in the South on improving our performance with the common chapter.
Our present common chapter is not the first chapter. Experience has shown that although the book was good, the movie was never made. This time we are trying to use the facilities of the North/South Ministerial Council and other initiatives to ensure that we meet the goals and aims in the common chapter. We want to ensure that funding support from Europe is used to achieve sensible North/South co-operation and economies of scale in infrastructural development.

Executive Business

Mr Kieran McCarthy: 5. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on business transacted at the last meeting of the Executive.
(AQO1317/01)

Rt Hon David Trimble: The last meeting of the Executive was held on 9 May. A copy of the press release issued after that meeting has been placed in the Assembly Library.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: I am deeply disappointed, but that answer was not unexpected. I have asked that question twice before. The first answer was that Executive business was confidential, and the second answer was that a press release had been placed in the Assembly Library.
We are living in an era where openness and transparency are the order of the day. People need to know what is going on in the Executive on general issues. Will the Minister tell the Assembly what action is taken on House resolutions? Was the water tax debated on 9 May, as reported in last week’s ‘Belfast Telegraph’? Was Lord Ouseley’s report on employment conditions and retirement for the Northern Ireland Civil Service discussed, and, if so, what were the recommendations? If the Executive have nothing to hide, let us hear from them.

Rt Hon David Trimble: I will gently point out to the Member — perhaps he was not in the Chamber then — that last Tuesday we made a detailed statement and answered questions for an hour on the reform and reinvestment initiative, the most significant matter that we have dealt with recently.
The Member must understand that discussions in the Executive are confidential, and press releases are issued about the business transacted. They do not give details of the discussion; that is quite right, and the Member knows that. Important matters are brought to the Assembly; statements are made and questions are answered.
Lord Ouseley’s report on appointments and promotions to the senior Civil Service and allied matters has not yet come to the Executive. When it does, and decisions are taken, a press release will be issued or a statement will be made in the House, if that is considered appropriate.

Mr Billy Hutchinson: Would it not be better to bring the business from last Thursday’s Executive meeting to the House rather than make a press statement? The press could find out details from the House. Members whose constituencies were affected should be able to debate matters raised in the press last week.

Rt Hon David Trimble: Mistaken impressions get around. While that question was being asked, I saw a Member flourishing a newspaper headline. It is an erroneous headline. The Member concerned will discover that when the consultation paper, which we think it refers to, is published in the next few weeks. The Member will then discover that having things published through the normal channels is much better than relying on rumour and report.
I am aware that the Member who asked the supplementary question has many serious concerns about events in his constituency. We are trying to focus on those concerns and to make some progress. We are happy to deal with those matters as openly as we can. Procedures exist, through statements and the tabling of private notice questions on matters of urgency, to ensure that there is adequate opportunity for the Assembly to express views on those matters. The type of open questioning afforded by Question Time also provides an opportunity to range widely, and we welcome that.

Mr Speaker: Before we move to the next question, I remind the House that it is not in order for Members to use any kinds of devices, to wave newspapers or otherwise. I understand that it is in order to wave Order Papers in approbation, but not newspapers.

Community Relations

Mr Edwin Poots: 6. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister how it appraises the benefits of money allocated to community relations.
(AQO1309/01)

Mr Mark Durkan: The benefits of money allocated to community relations are appraised in three main ways: by attitudinal surveys; by research projects; and by independent evaluations of funded groups. The bulk of community relations funding goes to the Community Relations Council and to support district council community relations programmes. That funding amounts to some £4·5 million of the total allocation of just over £5 million. Both the Community Relations Council and the district council community relations programmes have been subject to independent evaluation in the past 18 months. In both cases, positive conclusions were reached with regard to the impact of their activities and their value for money.

Mr Edwin Poots: Over the past 10 years, Departments have spent well over £100 million on community relations. All the evidence on the streets shows that community relations are worse. Will the Deputy First Minister confirm that the OFMDFM-commissioned report by Dr Peter Shirlow also expressed that view? Is that why the report has not seen the light of day?

Mr Mark Durkan: In answer to previous questions, I had to correct Members because of their confusion over two different reports. Dr Shirlow carried out work commissioned by the Belfast European Partnership Board. However, a separate piece of work, relating to other areas and times, was commissioned by OFMDFM. I caution the Member not to confuse the two.
A significant amount of money has been spent on community relations, and a significant amount of work remains to be done. It is a huge problem, and nobody is pretending that all the problems are behind us. We must be cautious about making sweeping judgements that community relations are worse, based on anecdotal evidence, on impressions from particular areas or on studies specific to those areas.

Mr Jim Wilson: Does the Deputy First Minister agree that there could not be a more graphic demonstration of community relations problems than the recent disorder in north Belfast? Is that not precisely the kind of issue that the Administration’s community relations policy should be tackling?

Mr Mark Durkan: The situation in north Belfast clearly reveals problems in community relations. However, there are also other problems. That is why the initiative that has been undertaken on behalf of the Executive is looking at various issues. The programmes of several Departments are relevant to the work that is being undertaken in north Belfast. We will continue to work to get on top of the problems in that area. We are reviewing our wider community relations policies to ensure that we are alert to all the problems and that we have responsive policy systems and support mechanisms, particularly in areas where problems are manifested.

Mr Alex Attwood: Does the Minister concur that the aim of community relations policies in the North is to light candles rather than curse the darkness, and that that approach is required? Will he comment on the events in east Belfast last weekend? As the Deputy First Minister has travelled many roads over the years, will he concur that our society is now more tolerant?

Mr Mark Durkan: I hope that everyone in the House will join me in expressing concern at the events in east Belfast. We do not want violence in any form, in any location, from any quarter, against any target, be that in north Belfast, east Belfast, east Derry, or anywhere else. We have seen violence in different forms, and I have consistently condemned it all. I hope that everyone in the House will continue to do so.
Although we repudiate and condemn such violence, we should take heart from the fact that new relationships are being built and are growing in this society, and new attitudes are being expressed. People can relate to one another politically, and they can relate to, and with, the shared Administration, albeit at times they may be critical of delivery and the pace of activity. We now have shared political space, and we must find ways to share the streets also.

Programme for Government Targets

Mr Gerry McHugh: 7. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what interim assessment it can make of those Programme for Government targets that it anticipates will be met within the agreed timescale.
(AQO1304/01)

Rt Hon David Trimble: The Executive monitor progress on delivering the actions set out in the Programme for Government regularly. The latest available information from the Departments shows that 28% of the 256 actions contained in the Programme for Government for 2001-02 have been achieved. A further 46% were in line for achievement in the published timescales. We are now collating the information, and we plan to report to the Assembly next month. Where progress has been slower than anticipated, our report will identify the reasons for the delay and the remedial action that the Executive intend to take. We are also working to deliver the commitments in the 2002-03 Programme for Government, which was finalised in December 2001. We will continue to monitor progress on all the actions in our first and current Programme for Government.

Mr Gerry McHugh: The Minister is aware of the concern that, because of the modest budget for the Programme for Government, targets will not be met. What action has he initiated to ensure better progress?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I outlined our key action in the lead answer. I emphasise its significance, because we are aware that some of the actions, precise targets and timetables have not been met. In order to deal with those delays, we must identify where and why they happened, and we are publishing information on that. It is worthy of attention, and the Executive ought to be congratulated on that.
We are the first Administration in any jurisdiction that operates a programme for government to publish details of the cases where they failed to achieve targets. Plenty of Governments will publish details of their successes, while trying to cover up difficulties. Many targets were not met because of circumstances beyond our control, but there cannot be an intelligent debate on that or a full appreciation of the difficulties of achieving change unless people can identify and focus on the problems and our actions to overcome them.
We intend to be as open about this matter as possible.

Mr Seamus Close: In the light of the Executive’s continuing failure to meet their own targets, does the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister agree that the proposed salary increases for the House are overgenerous? Does it believe that we require greater productivity from the Executive and the House to justify such increases?

Rt Hon David Trimble: It is not appropriate for me to comment on views expressed by the Senior Salaries Review Body or to call into question the actions of the Assembly Commission. Those bodies will take whatever decisions are appropriate. However, the supplementary question was misconceived. It is not appropriate to judge the Assembly’s success on whether the Departments and their officials have met all the targets in the Programme for Government.

Mr Speaker: I must bring the Minister’s response to a close because we are over the time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.

Regional Development

Mr Speaker: I wish to inform Members that question 4, in the name of Mr David Ford, has been transferred to the Department of the Environment and will receive a written answer.

Multilingual Signs

Mr John Dallat: 1. asked the Minister for Regional Development what plans he has to erect multilingual signs at airports and ferry ports to provide for the safety of foreign visitors.
(AQO1340/01)

Mr Peter Robinson: The police have not given the Roads Service any indication that there is a road safety problem associated with foreign drivers leaving the country’s airports or ferry ports. Therefore, I have no plans to erect multilingual signs at those facilities.
The provision of signs within ferry ports and airports is a matter for the authorities in those facilities. The majority of drivers visiting Northern Ireland come via airports and ferry ports in Great Britain or by road from the Republic of Ireland, and they will already have experienced the need to drive on the left hand side of the road.

Mr John Dallat: On this occasion I encourage the Minister to think positively and to accept that an increasing number of Europeans, particularly from Germany and France, come directly to Northern Ireland and hire vehicles here. Does he accept that he should consider the road safety aspect, as well as the politeness of recognising the German and French languages, as they do for us?

Mr Peter Robinson: Visitors are very welcome to Northern Ireland, and many of the road signs here will be part of the general harmonisation of road traffic signs in European countries. Road signs, where possible, include easily recognised symbols or pictograms to convey messages. However, there are significant cost considerations for multilingual signs, and at times they can cause confusion.

Mr Oliver Gibson: Can the Minister guarantee that his Department will not spend millions of pounds unnecessarily on bilingual signs when there are higher priorities in his Department?

Mr Peter Robinson: The original question was about multilingual signs; bilingual signs take us into a new area, and I assure my hon Friend that I have no intention of spending millions of pounds of much-needed infrastructure funding on bilingual signs.

Mr David McClarty: Following Pat McNamee’s promotion of plain English in last week’s debate on house purchase, is the Minister satisfied with the present signage in English at the Belfast City Airport, where some key signs are very confusing?

Mr Peter Robinson: For a moment I thought I was going to get a question about McDonald’s restaurant. I am happy to look at the signage at Belfast City Airport. I travel to and from it every week and I have not been confused, but maybe I was not looking at the signs as carefully as I should. I will look at the signs and see if there is any area of confusion.

Roads Infrastructure Around Ballyclare

Mr Jim Wilson: 2. asked the Minister for Regional Development what proposals he is currently considering to improve the roads infrastructure necessary to support (a) present and proposed housing; and (b) industrial development, in Ballyclare and its surrounding villages.
(AQO1331/01)

Mr Peter Robinson: The regional development strategy for Northern Ireland, which was agreed by the Assembly, identifies Ballyclare as one of the seven towns that will expand to meet the housing need in the Belfast metropolitan area. However, the strategy also recognises that it will be necessary to require developers to bear the costs of infrastructure works required to facilitate their development proposals, and that the promotion of transportation alternatives to the private car will also play a major role.
As regards current and future transport needs, my Department is developing the Belfast metropolitan transport plan, which I hope will be completed by the end of this financial year. It will inform the Belfast metropolitan area plan, which is being developed by the Planning Service. The transport plan will provide a long-term vision for transport in the Belfast metropolitan area, including the Ballyclare area, and it will co-ordinate the implementation of transportation initiatives until 2015.
The lines of two major road schemes in Ballyclare have been protected under the current area plan, which also identifies housing and industrial development in the town. The first scheme is a proposed link road between the Ballynure to Templepatrick road and the Ballyclare to Doagh road, with the purpose of easing congestion at the lower end of Main Street. The second proposed scheme, which will probably be led by developers, will link Doagh Road to Rashee Road. The schemes will be reviewed by the Belfast metropolitan transport plan, but if either is needed to support a development, the developer may have to contribute to it, in full or in part, depending on the outcome of the transport assessment.

Mr Jim Wilson: Does the Minister share my view that, where supporting road or sewerage infrastructure is not of an acceptable standard, as is the case in the Ballyclare area, his Department should advise the Planning Service to ban housebuilding in the town and surrounding villages until the necessary infrastructure is in place?

Mr Peter Robinson: I am sure that my Department consults closely with the Planning Service on such issues. I have experience of the conundrum that the Member referred to. In my constituency, significant land was zoned for development, but the necessary infrastructure was not provided until after the houses were built. Timing is an issue; however, if a development results in additional traffic or requires additional water infrastructure, the developer should provide the necessary infrastructure.

Mr David Hilditch: Is the Minister aware of an article on the front page of tonight’s ‘Belfast Telegraph’ about the A8, one of the main arterial routes, and will he comment on the story?

Mr Peter Robinson: I am aware of the inaccurate articles in the ‘Belfast Telegraph’. The headline on the front page states:
"Major road upgrade ‘futile’ claims report."
The report in question claims nothing of the sort. The claim that the upgrade was futile came from the so-called Friends of the Earth. The First Minister referred to inaccurate headlines in the ‘Belfast Telegraph’ — there are two tonight. The headline on page three states:
"Road upgrade ‘is a breach of EU rules’."
The report does not say that either; it says that some might argue that it is a breach of the rules, but it also sets out all the reasons why it is not. The articles contain a highly selective consideration of the report. It is only a draft report, and, when it is available in full, I will be happy to make it available to the Committee for Regional Development.

Mr Speaker: I heard several Members remark, sotto voce, about newspapers in the Chamber. I refer the House to the advice on Chamber etiquette in Standing Orders:
"Newspapers should not be brought into the Chamber except for quotation."
and
"Newspapers should not be brought into, or read in, the Chamber, except for brief quotations in the context of a speech."
On this occasion the bringing in of newspapers was in order, as they were quoted from briefly — although I remember other occasions on which that was not the case.

Reliability of Parking Meters

Mr Mark Robinson: 3. asked the Minister for Regional Development if he has any plans to improve the reliability of parking meters in Belfast.
(AQO1336/01)

Mr Peter Robinson: Pay-and-display parking machines, which were introduced in Belfast in 1987, have come to the end of their useful economic lives.
The Roads Service is installing new machines in the city centre. To date, some 110 new machines are in place, and a further 50 will be provided by the end of the summer. Each machine has a communications link to a central parking office. That enables the machine to report any faults automatically, thus allowing necessary repairs or maintenance work to be carried out as quickly as possible.

Mr Mark Robinson: I thank the Minister for his response. I noticed in the media at the end of last week an indication that Northern Ireland is at the cutting edge of technology, with the introduction of new parking meters. Could the Minister outline the benefits that will result following this introduction of new technology?

Mr Peter Robinson: Northern Ireland is taking a lead, not only in the United Kingdom but much further afield. Many vandalised or broken parking meters remain out of operation for a long time, and revenue to the Northern Ireland block is lost. The scheme uses SIM (subscriber identity module) card technology — as do the mobile phones that are occasionally heard ringing in the Chamber — so that the central office knows automatically when payments are made at a machine. As a result, only small sums of money are ever left in a parking meter, because it can be emptied when required. That removes the incentive to break into it. It also helps the Department to plan its collection of money. In addition, the machines accept credit cards, and therefore they will contain less money anyway.

Mr Billy Bell: The Minister recently said that he intended to decriminalise parking offences in Belfast and to civilianise the enforcement of parking regulations. What discussions has he had with his counterparts in Great Britain about their experiences of wheel-clamping in urban areas?

Mr Peter Robinson: That is not a matter of choice for the Department, because the police have indicated their eagerness to give up their role as regards parking. Some might argue that they gave it up some time ago. Parking offences must be dealt with, so the Department will become responsible for the matter. Legislation will have to be passed by the Assembly. The Department has discussed the issue with the police, and departmental officials are talking to authorities elsewhere in the United Kingdom about their experiences. Northern Ireland is the only region of the United Kingdom that has not already decriminalised parking offences.

Walking Strategy

Mr Gerry McHugh: 5. asked the Minister for Regional Development, in relation to the draft walking strategy, to outline (a) the targets he is proposing for the promotion of the activity of walking; and (b) the measures that are being put in place to ensure that those targets are achieved.
(AQO1328/01)

Mr Peter Robinson: The Department’s draft walking strategy is still at a preparatory stage. However, consideration is being given to the setting of targets in the draft strategy, aimed at increasing the number of short walking journeys — that is to say, those of less than one mile — and the average distance walked annually by each person. Consideration is also being given to the inclusion of targets linked to the Department’s regional transportation strategy as regards the provision of infrastructure and the promotion of walking. It is proposed that the draft strategy will contain around 80 "planned actions"; those are a series of initiatives and practical measures that will contribute to the achievement of targets and will be assigned to key stakeholders with the aim of delivering improvements for pedestrians. The "planned actions" fall under the headings of design, planning, safety, improving existing routes, walking for health, walking for leisure, tourism and marketing. The Department hopes to publish the strategy later this year.

Mr Gerry McHugh: I thank the Minister for his detailed answer. It is an important subject, especially for those who wish to start walking to work, and for schoolchildren. ‘Investing for Health’, published in November 2000, and with targets for April 2001, contains the Department for Regional Development’s commitments as regards support and investment in health. When does the Minister envisage that those targets will be met?

Mr Peter Robinson: I am delighted that Sinn Féin has a walking strategy. I hope that Orangemen in various parts of the Province will gain from the additional miles that they will be able to walk as part of that strategy.
The regional transportation strategy is expected to come to the Assembly before the summer recess, and the Northern Ireland walking strategy will be published later this year. Those two documents will consider the walking strategy and any targets that might be relevant to it.

Mr Sammy Wilson: I am glad that the Minister has noted the change in Sinn Féin’s attitude towards walking. It is nice to see that there has been a change of heart, and that Sinn Féin now wishes to promote walking in Northern Ireland.
Given that much traffic congestion, especially in cities, occurs at the start and finish of the school day, what plans does the Minister have for safer walking routes to schools so that schoolchildren can avail of that option as opposed to having to use either public or private transport?

Mr Peter Robinson: That issue was discussed with officials and interest groups within the past few days. Due to the lengthy period of civil disturbance, many people thought it was safer to leave their children to school by car, even for very short journeys. The community needs to feel confident that the troubles are behind us. Until there is clear evidence of that, it will be hard to convince some people that they should choose walking as an alternative to taking their children to school by car.
Traffic-calming measures are an incentive for walking. The regional transportation strategy envisages a significant increase in the number of traffic-calming schemes, which would reduce the danger for people walking.

Dual Carriageways in Tyrone and Fermanagh

Mr Barry McElduff: 6. asked the Minister for Regional Development to detail the number of dual carriageway miles in Counties Tyrone and Fermanagh; and to make a statement.
(AQO1339/01)

Mr Peter Robinson: There are 7·9 miles of motorway and 1·7 miles of dual carriageway in Counties Tyrone and Fermanagh. The majority of trunk roads in those counties are single-carriageway roads, which can cope adequately with the volume of traffic on those routes.

Mr Barry McElduff: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I welcome the fact that the Minister and Sammy Wilson referred to Sinn Féin by its correct title, without any appendage, in the previous answer, and I thank them.
The Minister will appreciate that Tyrone and Fermanagh depend heavily on roads infrastructure, because there is no rail network. The figures of 7·9 miles of motorway and 1·7 miles of dual carriageway speak for themselves and show historic underinvestment. Can the Minister deliver a real commitment to increasing the number of dual carriageway and motorway miles in Tyrone and Fermanagh? A good start would be the roads from Dungannon to Ballygawley, Ballygawley to Omagh and Omagh to Strabane on the major arterial route, the A5, which carries much cross-border traffic.

Mr Peter Robinson: One of the first council visits that I made as Minister was to Fermanagh District Council. As someone who represents the east of the Province, I was struck by the feelings of councillors from all parties who were present that the area had been given a very raw deal because money for roads went to where the traffic was heaviest, which is largely in the east of the Province. I said that it was necessary for us to examine the criteria under which we operate and to consider whether those criteria were fair, because funding based on those criteria could mean that there might never be new roads to the west of the Province.
Arising from the draft regional transportation strategy, I tasked my officials with reconsidering how we could start to provide stepped improvements. They will consider issues of affordability, priority and innovative procurement mechanisms with the regional transportation strategy team. In that context, issues such as the road between Dungannon and Ballygawley, which would be the outworking of such a policy, will be examined. I am seeking to do something more innovative than that which was laid out in the draft regional transportation strategy, and when the strategy is put before the Assembly, Members will see that the tweaking has made some difference.

Mr Denis Watson: Will the Minister indicate to the House — particularly for the benefit of the IRA/Sinn Féin Member for West Tyrone — whether criteria exist for the construction of dual carriageways and motorways in Northern Ireland?

Mr Peter Robinson: The manual indicates that, in general, a dual carriageway may be viable where more than 11,000 vehicles per day use a road: a similar volume of traffic applies when the viability of a motorway is being considered. The type of traffic and the extent to which the volume per day exceeds that figure must be examined. The availability of finance to carry out the work is also a factor.
The regional transport strategy will become a central element, and should the Assembly accept the strategy, it will envisage a significant increase in the amount of money available for roads and public transport schemes in Northern Ireland. Only by adopting such a scheme will we be able to meet the expectations of many district councillors and MLAs.

Mr Derek Hussey: The Minister is well aware of my view — through the Committee for Regional Development and the Chamber — that key regional transportation corridors should be dual carriageways. However, I understand the financial constraints.
Furthermore, the Minister will understand that the north-western and eastern areas of Northern Ireland have rail services, whereas the south-west does not. In rural areas, the nature of the vehicles involved is a major factor affecting average journey times. In that context, is the Minister considering the extension of the motorway to Ballygawley, or at least to the edge of West Tyrone? None of the 8·4 miles of motorway or dual carriageway mentioned are in that area.

Mr Peter Robinson: It is very easy to look at the road infrastructure on a map of Northern Ireland and see where significant improvements could be made. The guiding principle in the regional transportation strategy is that proposals must be earthed in reality: we must be capable of delivering them and, essentially, that means that the funding for schemes must be available.
I agree that strategic road corridors must be investigated first: many of them feed into the west of the Province. Improvements can be made — in some cases that will involve dual carriageways; in other cases different improvements can help. We must pay most attention to strategic road corridors. That principle was enunciated in the regional development strategy, which was the mother document of the regional transportation strategy.

Water Leakage

Mr Joe Byrne: 7. asked the Minister for Regional Development what measures he is taking to address the level of leakage in Northern Ireland’s water supply system.
(AQO1329/01)

Mr Peter Robinson: The Water Service has a strategy in place to identify, manage and control leakage in the water distribution system. The main elements are the installation and monitoring of district meters, pressure management schemes and leak detection and repair. Over the past four years, £22 million has been invested in leakage reduction measures. Approximately half of that was invested in setting up the essential leakage management infrastructure, including district meters and telemetry.
A further £25 million will be invested over the next four years. As the leakage infrastructure is well advanced, 80% of that expenditure will go directly to detecting and repairing leaks. The aim is to achieve the economic level of leakage by 2006.

Mr Joe Byrne: Does the Minister concede that water leakage of 37% is unacceptable and costly? Given that the water resource strategy identified serious supply difficulties in the western area in 2000, with demand exceeding supply by six million litres a day, what action is the Department taking to address the infrastructure difficulties that are especially relevant to Counties Tyrone and Fermanagh, and the western half of County Derry?

Mr Peter Robinson: The level of leakage is unacceptable, and that is why the Department has allocated increased funding. The leakage is the result of the ageing infrastructure, which is the legacy of years of neglect under direct rule. Nonetheless, we must make changes through leakage detection and remedial action to improve the infrastructure. Other changes will result from the water resource strategy, which the Department has submitted to the Committee for Regional Development. I hope to introduce that strategy to the Assembly soon by way of a take-note debate. As part of the water resource strategy, the Department will consider the issues, such as how it can meet any deficits between existing water supply and usage, to which Mr Byrne referred.

Mr Duncan Dalton: Will the Minister clarify what the leakage figure is? Mr Byrne quoted a figure of 37%, but I understood it to be more in the region of 33%. Does the figure change between night-time and daytime? Does the level of leakage reduce when the system is used more during the day? What proposals does the Minister have to fill the funding gap that will be left by improving the infrastructure?

Mr Peter Robinson: It is difficult to be precise about the percentage figure. The Department does not dare to refer to the lost water as leakage, although that is the common parlance. It is known as "unaccounted-for water", and it is unaccounted for because no domestic metering takes place. Given that the Department knows how much water leaves the reservoirs, but does not know how much is used by domestic consumers, assessments are made. Whether the figure is 33% or 37% — I have even heard it estimated at 40% — is a matter of conjecture. However, the level is unacceptable and the problem must be addressed.
The new telemetry will allow the Department to more accurately assess the areas in which leakage occurs, the amount of leakage and the time of day at which it takes place. I hope to be in a better position to answer the more detailed questions at a later stage.
Mr Byrne managed to ask several questions. To answer his final one, the Department estimates that £3 billion will be needed over the next 20 years for infrastructural requirements for water and sewerage services. A similar amount will be required for roads and transportation. Therefore, there are significant infrastructural requirements, and the Assembly can make a good start towards addressing those by ceasing to spend up to £150 million a year on bureaucratic extravagance. Instead, that amount could be used to service a loan of around £2 billion that could really help water and road services.

Mr Seamus Close: I congratulate the Minister on his in-depth knowledge of leaks. After the publication of the Public Accounts Committee’s report, has he reviewed his target of an anticipated reduction in water leakage of between 3% and 7% to the more challenging figure of 15%?

Mr Speaker: I regret to say that the time is up. I shall have to ask the Minister to reply in writing to the Member.

Environment

Mr Speaker: I wish to inform Members that question 1, standing in the name of Mr Arthur Doherty, has been transferred to the Minister for Regional Development and will receive a written answer. Question 9, standing in the name of Mrs Annie Courtney, has been transferred to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and will also receive a written answer.

Checking of Planning Applications

Mr Kieran McCarthy: 2. asked the Minister of the Environment what steps are being taken to ensure that information supplied by applicants when seeking planning permission is genuine and correct.
(AQO1346/01)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: It is in the interests of applicants and the public to have the correct details when submitting a planning application; any inaccuracies may lead to delays in processing the application. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that accurate information on the four key areas is supplied, namely: the address of the application site; the description of the proposal; the completion of the P2 certificate regarding legal interest in the application site; and the details of notifiable neighbours. To assist in the correct completion of application forms, explanatory notes on applying for planning permission and notes for completing the main application form, P1, are supplied with an application pack. Further advice and assistance are also available from staff in the divisional planning office.
To further ensure the correctness of the information in the application form, the Planning Service carries out an initial validation to confirm that the forms have been completed properly and the correct fee submitted. Further checks on the information’s accuracy are made during the planning officer’s visit to the site. Representations made by third parties may also raise discrepancies in the applicant’s information. If the information on the application form has to be revised in the interests of accuracy, it will be re-advertised in the press, and neighbours will be renotified.
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr J Wilson] in the Chair)

Mr Kieran McCarthy: In cases where inaccurate information has been furnished to the Department of the Environment, how determined is the Department to correct those inaccuracies? Are there sufficient enforcement staff in the Department to ensure that everyone gets a fair deal?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I will answer the second point first. The Assembly knows that the Department of the Environment has been viewed as somewhat of a Cinderella — funds have not been given to it in the past. However, additional funds have been supplied, there are more Planning Service officials in place, and, we trust, any shortfall has been improved. That is not to say that there is complacency or that we do not need more staff — quite the reverse. More staff may be needed. Indeed, we are looking at the whole process.
The Department of the Environment is determined to correct inaccuracies. All addresses and descriptions of applications are checked for accuracy when they go in the press. As well as that, all the neighbour notification names must be inserted, and if they are not, there will be delays. The forms must be accurate. Last week, a seminar on planning matters was conducted with the construction industry at which the results of a survey carried out by a private consultancy firm were discussed. One of the points that the survey mentioned was that the process was slow because accuracy had to be checked.
Therefore I remain convinced that the Department should insist on accuracy, and that inaccuracies cause delays.

Rev William McCrea: When an applicant states that he owns a property, and the accuracy of that claim is challenged by the legal adviser of a neighbour, is it proper for the Department not only to consider and process, but to determine and approve an application for that ground?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Land ownership is important, but the term "legal interest" is more appropriate. Applicants must complete properly a P2 form where they must state their legal interest in the land. An applicant may or may not own the land, but he must declare that information. We do not check the accuracy of every form, but third parties have the opportunity to challenge applications, because they are publicly advertised. We endeavour to confirm the accuracy of the forms, but discrepancies and inaccuracies cause delays.

Mr Derek Hussey: Is the information contained in objections to planning applications also checked and validated?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: All elements are checked and validated, and, more generally, all elements are considered in determining planning applications. That applies across the spectrum of people who are officially consulted. The information provided during the planning process is validated, whether it be for an application or an objection to an application.

Protected Habitats and Unique Biological Communities

Mr Barry McElduff: 3. asked the Minister of the Environment to make a statement on the threat to protected habitats and unique biological communities.
(AQO1350/01)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: A Northern Ireland countryside survey published by the Department of the Environment in November 2000 sets out the main changes in the countryside over a 10-year period up until 1998. It identified a loss of species-rich grassland and wetland habitats as one of the main trends during that time.
Using data from the survey, my Department’s Environment and Heritage Service is developing several biodiversity action plans for important habitats and vulnerable species in Northern Ireland. The main means of protecting habitats and biological communities, as well as sites that are important for earth science conservation, is the declaration of Areas of Special Scientific Interest (ASSIs), under the Nature Conservation and Amenity Lands (Northern Ireland) Order 1985.
To date, the Department of the Environment has declared 196 ASSIs. Although most sites have remained in good condition following their declaration, there is evidence that some sites or parts of sites have been damaged, while others have deteriorated through neglect or inappropriate management. Weakness in the legislation has contributed to this situation. Following public consultation, the Department of the Environment has therefore been developing proposals to strengthen the legislation governing the protection and management of ASSIs. I recently circulated the proposals in the Executive, with a view to bringing a Bill before the Assembly in the next session.

Mr Barry McElduff: Is the Minister satisfied with the level of cross-departmental co-operation aimed at providing the necessary resources to ensure protection — for example, farmers who may have difficulty in affording infrastructure on their farms? Also, will the Minister comment on the level of threat to protected habitats from other Government Departments?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: There are two elements in a cross-departmental aspect to farming. One is the farmers, and the other is the cross-departmental nature. There is cross-departmental co-operation, and I referred to this previously when I talked about working with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Bríd Rodgers. We have written and oral contact about what needs to be done, and when I had discussions with the Ulster Farmers’ Union, Ms Rodgers and I apprised each other.
With respect to the farming community, I am conscious that this aspect needs to be fostered. From the point of ownership of the land, 4,500 farmers or developers are responsible for the ASSIs they occupy, and we need their co-operation to manage ASSIs effectively. In bringing forward these proposals, we are trying to bring a balance in greater regulation and trying to get help in managing the ASSIs better. I am aware that farmers will be financially compensated for managing ASSIs. We must satisfy a Programme for Government commitment, which is to have a policy and a legislative framework for protecting and managing areas in place by July 2003.
We are always mindful of what other Government Departments do. I have mentioned the example of the Department of Agriculture and co-operation with it.

Mr Tom Hamilton: Will the Minister detail what action he is planning to take in response to the report of the Northern Ireland Biodiversity Group?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: The Northern Ireland Biodiversity Group presented its report in October 2000 and made 76 recommendations for biodiversity conservation up to and including the year 2016. Other Departments are discussing this document — and therein is a further answer to the last question — and we anticipate publishing the final document in June. We are not complacent, and action is already under way in the Department with respect to the Irish hare and the curlew, because they are rare species. There will also be the implementation of an action plan by the Department between 2002 and 2005 on those recommendations that fall within its remit. We are responding, and we are dealing with other Departments as well.

Mr Jim Shannon: What provision is there in the present system for landowners or farmers who wish to construct a building or a house to ensure the long-term viability of a farm holding that could be subject to protective habitats and unique biological communities?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: The farming sector is important, and it is important for the management of protected landscapes and areas of special scientific interest that farmers agree with what we wish to do. The aspects raised by Mr Shannon are discussed as and when they arise. However, for the third time in answer to this question, I stress that I recognise the importance of the farming community and the contribution it makes to the agrifood industry in Northern Ireland and to the protection of ASSIs.
There are currently 196, but it is anticipated that a further 200 may be needed when the review is complete. We will need the agriculture industry to work with us and complement our work to protect agriculture and areas of special scientific interest.

Planning Issues in North Down

Mrs Eileen Bell: 4. asked the Minister of the Environment what assessment he has made in relation to the areas he visited and planning issues he discussed during his private ministerial visit to North Down on Friday 26 April 2002; and to make a statement.
(AQO1356/01)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: My visit to north Down on Friday 26 April 2002 formed part of my ministerial duties. Its purpose was to hear at first hand the concerns of representatives of local conservation and residents’ groups about the Planning Service’s decisions on residential developments in Bangor, Holywood, Helen’s Bay and Donaghadee. The issues discussed related to concerns about loss of character in high-quality residential areas; the increase in apartment development; unsuccessful enforcement action; and a request for conservation area status from one group. The visit was helpful in highlighting the areas of concern, and I will pursue these in the normal manner.

Mrs Eileen Bell: I thank the Minister for his informative reply. It was interesting because other constituency Members have been working on all those areas for years. The information gained from that visit and from the Minister’s answer will be worthwhile for all of us.
Will the Minister explain the difference between a ministerial visit and a private ministerial visit? Is the inclusion of publicity a factor, and what protocols apply to that? If that were clear, perhaps interested MLAs from the same area — other than those from the Minister’s own party — might also attend. [Interruption]. That is true.

Mr Alan McFarland: That is out of order.

Mrs Eileen Bell: It is not out of order.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I am glad that Mrs Bell has clarified what is probably the true reason for asking the question. Other constituency Members have been working for years on the points that I have been dealing with. There is nothing unusual about that.
Mrs Bell asked about the difference between a ministerial visit and a private ministerial visit. I note that she used the word "private", not I. I keep apprised of what happens in the media. One of the papers said that it was an informal visit. Let me put it clearly on the record: I was accompanied at the meeting by my private secretary and by the planning officer for that area. I have met delegations in my office before — some from one party, some from several parties — and I have dealt with specific issues in a specific area. On none of those occasions were all Members present nor all parties represented. Not only —[Interruption].

Mr Jim Wilson: Order.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: It is all right, Mr Deputy Speaker; I am a tolerant person. I assure the Member that this is not the first time that I have met a delegation on site, nor will it be the last. I go where I can as time permits. I prefer to describe it as an on-site office meeting.
Let me also stress that I will not tolerate the use or abuse of my ministerial position by any MLA. I have written to one MLA and made clear to him the impact of the statement that he issued.
I walk a tight line; I must be fully cognisant of the circumstances before I reach any decision.
Therefore I must decide when, where or how I gather that information. I am satisfied with what I did. I resent the comment that I was dealing differently with a Member from my party. That was not the case.

Ms Jane Morrice: I wish to find out more about that meeting. I would appreciate information on the visits to Bangor, Holywood, Helen’s Bay and Donaghadee. The Minister has given us some details; I want more specific information.
It is interesting that the Minister was information-gathering in order to make a decision. The request for conservation area status for Holywood is valuable for the group. Has the Minister made a decision on that, and if not, when will it be made? Did any other action points emerge from the visit?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Round two, Mr Deputy Speaker.
I may or may not have been information-gathering to make a decision. I said that I was gathering information for when I may make a decision. I was dealing with officials and issues on a site visit.
Ms Morrice asked about conservation areas, and they are important. All settlements in Northern Ireland have their own identity. I was in Holywood, which has its identity. I have visited Hillsborough, which has its identity. I have been to other places that have their identities. Each place has its own distinctive characteristic, which could be based on its architecture, history or layout. We must form an opinion, and if the buildings are listed buildings, they are likely to become conservation areas.
Others areas that would require a certain level of protection would become areas of townscape character. We must bear those important considerations in mind.
There is also the issue of apartments that are being built in towns. The planning process dictates that 60% of dwellings have to be built in towns. We apply a mixture of general principles to particular circumstances.

Mr Peter Weir: As someone who, along with other Assembly Members, was not invited to the meeting, I would be interested to find out more information on the concerns raised, and what the Minister intends to do about them.
What plans has the Minister to give teeth to the concept of townscape character? A major concern in north Down and elsewhere has been that his Department has issued stop notices and enforcement notices, but has not followed them up with court action when they have been ignored. What plans has he to reverse the previous practice of not enforcing those notices and to take the developers to court as an example to others?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: The record may show, or Mr Weir may clarify, that he said that he was not invited to the meeting. How many times must I say that the meeting I held was similar to other meetings that I hold, in that a Member makes a request about an issue and attends along with other people? That could mean a Member from any party. That was not the only time I was on site, and it was with a Member who did not belong to the Ulster Unionist Party.
I do not like Mr Weir’s innuendo that he was not invited to the meeting.

Mr Peter Weir: It is a statement of fact.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I note that it is a statement of fact. When I have a meeting dealing with planning applications, a general invitation does not go out to all MLAs in whose constituency the area concerned is. That is protocol, and that is what happens.
On the Member’s second point about enforcement, we are bringing forward the planning (amendment) Bill, which will have enforcement powers. I wish to see stronger enforcement powers. I want those powers to be implemented for the benefit of all, so that no one in Northern Ireland will be under the illusion that planning can be flouted in a cavalier way.

Apartment Developments in South Belfast

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: 5. asked the Minister of the Environment whether he has any plans to restrict the opportunity for apartment development on the sites of family homes in South Belfast; and to make a statement.
(AQO1357/01)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I am aware of concerns about the growth of apartment developments on such sites in south Belfast. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the demand for small unit housing, including apartments. My Department has been seeking to clarify the planning policy context for dealing with those proposals.
The Member will be aware that the regional development strategy seeks to promote more sustainable forms of development through a two-pronged approach of encouraging compact urban forms and promoting more housing in existing urban areas. New residential development can, however, threaten local character and identity. The strategy also requires that densification should be achieved without town cramming — the forcing of overdeveloped and unsympathetic housing schemes into established residential areas.
Planning policy for housing is set out in my Department’s Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7) ‘Quality Residential Environments’. That statement requires developers to provide high-quality housing proposals on both brownfield and greenfield sites that are sympathetic to the character of an area, in order to avoid a level of intensification that can adversely affect local townscape character and identity. Sensitive judgements are required so that the correct balance is achieved between ensuring that proposals are sympathetic to their context, and have respect for local amenities, and seeking to achieve the target in the regional development strategy of increasing housing provision in existing urban areas.
Particular sensitivity is required in the primarily residential parts of conservation areas, and in areas of townscape character, where planning policy is to grant proposals involving intensification of site usage only in exceptional circumstances. PPS 7 also points out that the demolition of property will not create a presumption that permission for far more intensive and high-density development will be granted.
My Department has also issued draft supplementary planning guidance in the form of Development Control Advice Note 8, ‘Small Unit Housing. New Development in Existing Residential Areas’, which it intends to publish in final form in the near future. That document provides more detailed guidance on proposals for small unit housing in existing urban areas. Although it does not set policy, it gives guidance to developers on the physical form of housing development, including apartments, and on the relationship with surrounding properties.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: I thank the Minister for his lengthy statement; it certainly clarifies many matters. Does he agree that the conservation area announced last year by his predecessor, Sam Foster, does not seem to have stopped the rot? The announcement of a conservation area in such a large area of south Belfast was very welcome. However, developments — and the threat of large developments — are still taking place.
Only last week, there was publicity surrounding a house in Ashley Avenue that was previously occupied by the poet Séamus Heaney. That house appears to have been left to rot and decay to the point where it will be demolished and replaced by an unsuitable block of flats. I am sure that the Minister has seen many of the sites in south Belfast, but I would be glad to invite him to inspect that site, either with or without my being present. There is a major issue to be resolved, as was highlighted by the case of Séamus Heaney’s former house in Ashley Avenue last week.

Mr Jim Wilson: Minister, you have less than a minute to respond.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I smile about the invitation to come to south Belfast. As and when my diary permits, I can and do make visits.
I am visiting a constituency on a different matter with someone from the Member’s party. That is how life is in politics. The loss of built heritage in the Malone area has escalated, and the Government designated it a conservation area in 2000. Therefore, express consent must be given for the demolition of any building, and new development must comply with PPS 6, which protects the character of conservation areas. That has been the Department’s response.

Mr Edwin Poots: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Minister has achieved a new record for the least number of questions answered: he got to the fourth question. Will some direction be given to Ministers so that we get more answers and less waffle?

Mr Jim Wilson: I have noted that we managed to deal with only four questions, which is somewhat unfair to those coming behind. I will return to the issue, and I will examine Hansard to see if I was guilty in any way of prolonging the questions and answers, but I do not think that I was. Four questions was not very good.

Mr Roy Beggs: On a further point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I refer to the operational advice notes in the Standing Orders handbook. I have placed two questions for written answer — AQW 2344/01 and AQW2345/01 — to the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Following numerous telephone calls, faxes and promises, I still do not have answers to those questions, which are now two months overdue. According to the handbook, questions should be tabled "ten clear working days" before they are due for answer. How can I get answers to my constituents’ concerns?

Mr Jim Wilson: That is not a point of order. It is a matter for the Executive, and I am sure that they have heard your concerns and complaint.

Mr Ivan Davis: Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like Members to be aware that the Committee for Procedures and the Business Committee are examining the issue of questions, and they have requested input from Members.
Motion made:
That the Assembly do now adjourn. — [Mr Deputy Speaker.]

Lack of Investment in the A20 Newtownards to Portaferry Road

Mr Kieran McCarthy: I would like to thank Members for giving me the opportunity to bring this important aspect of our daily lives before the Assembly, and I would also like to thank the Minister for his presence.
Lack of investment in roads means risks for road safety. I offer my deepest sympathy to the relatives of the latest victims of a serious road accident, on the Ballymena to Ballymoney road over the weekend. Recently, there was also a fatality on the A20.
Although the A20 Newtownards to Portaferry road is a main arterial route carrying an ever-increasing number of vehicles every day, its condition, and the lack of funding for maintenance and upgrading, is replicated on every public road south of the floodgates as one leaves Newtownards, throughout the Ards borough and the Strangford constituency.
The deplorable conditions of our roads affect every constituent. Road users are angry and frustrated, and they ask constantly why they pay car tax. There is little or no industry on the Ards Peninsula, which means that constituents have to travel to where they can find employment, and the vast majority of people are forced to use the A20. Some people are employed on the other side of Strangford Lough, and they use the ferry and then travel on to their work.
(Madam Deputy Speaker [Ms Morrice] in the Chair)
I doubt that the conditions of the roads on the other side of Strangford Lough are much better. However, I offer sympathy to those who live in Portaferry and beyond who must use the main road to Newtownards twice daily to get to and from work. The A20 contains continuous twists, corners, humps and hollows, with a scattering of potholes, utility manhole covers, sunken gratings, sunken verges and flooding when there is heavy rainfall. All those deficiencies contribute to a less safe road environment, and, thus, we are vulnerable to road accidents, and, unfortunately, fatalities.
Although the local Roads Service office does its best with its limited resources, I continue to hear from angry road users who have driven into a pothole and smashed a tyre and wheel, but who find it difficult to get compensation from the Roads Service. This morning I received a letter from a constituent who had lodged a claim for £64·63 against the Department for Regional Development as a result of damage caused by a pothole. After an eight-month investigation, that constituent was told:
"your claim for compensation has been unsuccessful. As the leaflet enclosed with your claim form explained, the DOE (NI) is obliged, under the relevant legislation — the Roads (Northern Ireland) Order 1993 — to maintain the roads to a reasonable standard.
Where it has not done so and a road user sustains damage to their vehicle because of this lack of maintenance, the legislation allows them to claim compensation from the Department."
On that occasion, a pothole contributed to £64 worth of damage. However, the letter further states that
"where the Department can show that it was carrying out a reasonable system of maintenance of the road in question, it is entitled to defend any claim for compensation brought under this legislation."
The Department dismissed this genuine claim for 64 quid. The loophole seems typical; ordinary road users are treated abysmally. Other Members may have heard similar accounts.
The A20 has remained largely unchanged despite the ever-increasing volume of vehicular traffic and newer, larger lorries, which undoubtedly contribute to the deterioration of roads. A further concern is the risk of serious accidents involving the many school buses, sometimes overcrowded, on that road.
The appalling condition of the A20 at Main Street in Kircubbin must be brought to the Minister’s attention. As with all busy streets, a pedestrian crossing was needed on Kircubbin’s Main Street to increase the safety of children and senior citizens. The Roads Service denied a request for a crossing, and a concoction of kerb build-outs was provided, to the dissatisfaction of local residents. A request has been sent to the Roads Service for the build-outs’ removal, because they actually caused an accident. Recently, improvements were completed on a small section of Main Street in Greyabbey, which is also part of the A20, leaving the rest of the town in an appalling condition.
I remind the Minister of his recently launched regional transport strategy, in which no forward plan for the Ards Peninsula was considered. In the summary of funding for each area, neither the Ards Peninsula, nor Portaferry, nor Kircubbin was even mentioned. There is not even a line on the map to show that the A20 exists.
As matters stand, the traffic congestion on the A20 can only get worse as more vehicles take to the road. Surely there has been some thought of future investment such as in the provision of a light rail system along the centre of the peninsula or a dual carriageway, or even widening the existing A20. Constituents expect, at minimum, extra funding for a good, even road surface that will allow safe passage without risking lives every day, and the Minister must give us a fair share of funding for better roads and for the A20 in particular.
I am grateful to the MP, Mrs Iris Robinson, who set up a meeting with the Minister and the Roads Service to allow me to discuss the problems on behalf of my constituents.

Mr Tom Hamilton: Many areas of great natural beauty suffer because of their attractiveness, and the Ards Peninsula is no exception. There are constant conflicts of interest between the legitimate economic needs of the local people, the equally legitimate need to conserve the undoubted natural beauty of the peninsula and the right of the population of Greater Belfast to enjoy the scenic resort value of the area, and finding a balance between those conflicting interests will never be easy. Added to that is the increased volume of traffic that is inevitably caused by the expanding towns along the A20, such as Greyabbey, Kircubbin and Portaferry.
The regional development plan envisages building some 7,000 extra dwellings on or around the peninsula in the next 10 years. Existing road traffic volume problems are bound to get worse and are important enough to be addressed, but underinvestment makes them doubly important.
I have been raising the issue of underinvestment in the Ards Peninsula’s roads for some time, and the Minister for Regional Development’s answer to a question tabled by me on 12 March 2002 revealed its true extent. In 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 the amounts spent by the Department on roads in the boroughs of Ards and Castlereagh that comprise my constituency of Strangford tell a sorry tale. In the three successive years £453,000, £204,000 and £297,000 respectively was spent on roads in the borough of Ards. In the same years, £1,431,000, £408,000 and £1,167,000 was spent on the roads in Castlereagh. That means that a total of £954,000 was invested in the Ards roads in the three-year period compared to some £2,500,000 in the Castlereagh roads. Broadly, Castlereagh received 75% of the investment, while Ards received only 25%.
Although I welcome the level of investment in Castlereagh, which is part of my constituency, I am alarmed at the year-after-year disparity between Castlereagh and Ards. Recurring disparities such as that soon build into major disadvantage, and Ards is approaching that situation.
I am surprised that the Minister is not sensitive about this, as Castlereagh is his home territory and political stamping ground. It is only recently that his family interests have expanded, albeit temporarily, into Strangford. I would have thought that in the interests of the Minister’s own domestic bliss and harmony, he might listen to his lady wife, who represents Strangford at Westminster — at least for the time being. I am surprised that the Minister can stand over such a massive disparity in spending on roads in two adjacent borough council areas.
What is even more revealing is the fact, again gleaned from the Minister’s answer to my question, that Ards Borough Council receives only 1% of Province-wide spending on roads. That happens year after year. There are 26 district councils, so that amounts to an average spend of around 4% in each council area, yet Ards receives only 1%. When that is compounded year after year, it amounts to disadvantage. The Minister’s argument that roads policy is decided Province-wide and is linked to traffic flow, the number of accidents, environmental impact and value for money is all very well. Those are factors in mitigation, but they are not substantive enough to explain the glaring 3:1 disparity in spending on roads in two adjacent borough council areas. I welcome the spending on roads in Castlereagh. However, that disparity between the Ards average and the provincial average and the fact that an adjacent borough received three times as much as Ards must be explained.
Traffic flows on the Ards Peninsula must be addressed strategically before they inevitably worsen as a result of growing populations in key towns. The balance between business traffic, such as prawn and fish lorries from Portavogie, and domestic traffic that uses the A20 as its main route must also be addressed. Patterns of road utilisation — why the A20 is favoured over the Irish Sea coast road, for example — must be investigated. However, nothing beats investment. The Minister knows that, and so does the House. It seems that Ards has been left behind by all the standards of fairness. The Assembly must seek a commitment from the Minister that that will be addressed urgently.

Mr Jim Shannon: I request investment for the A20 Newtownards to Portaferry road. That encompasses several roads along the Ards Peninsula. Those of us who use the A20 several times a day know that the road is notoriously dangerous, with its sharp corners and sweeping bends. Many residents are loath to use the road at night. Imagine one’s travel or activities being restricted because the main local road is too dangerous to travel at night.
The road is also dangerous in the rush hours: first thing in the morning and between 5.00 pm and 7.00 pm. A few months ago a car and its lady driver ended up on the lough shore. Luckily for that lady, the tide was out, or there could have been another fatality. In the past few months there have been two fatalities on the A20, and our thoughts are with those families who lost loved ones. The lady’s car ended up on the lough shore because there were no defensive barriers. She had to be cut free from the wreckage. The problem is compounded by the fact that the emergency services also use the A20 to reach people who have been injured. The road has received little investment in the past 20 years.
Mr McCarthy has suggested that a pedestrian crossing is needed in Kircubbin. There have also been requests for pedestrian crossings at other locations, such as Greyabbey and Ballywalter.
Greyabbey is on the A20; Ballywalter is on the other side of the peninsula. There have been requests for pedestrian crossings but they have not yet been acceded to, primarily because of legal criteria on pedestrian crossings. Perhaps the Minister could inform us of the position on pedestrian crossings and whether there is any intention of changing those criteria so that the people who have requested, and badly need, pedestrian crossings in Greyabbey, Kircubbin and Ballywalter can have their requests met.
The same thing applies to traffic-management schemes. Local groups and elected representatives have requested that traffic-management schemes be put in place, again for Greyabbey and Ballywalter. Unfortunately, the necessary finance has not yet been forthcoming. The A20 has been given what I call "reactionary repairs", which usually means patching up potholes and erecting defence barriers at accident black spots.
There has been very little concerted effort to bring the road into the twenty-first century. The volume of traffic is increasing, and as cars become more affordable as they come into line with European prices, it can only be assumed that there will be more cars in the future. Therefore, it would seem impossible for the Government not to spend money on the country’s infrastructure to keep up with the demands of the people. The infrastructure is at least 20 years out of date. The A20 has had little significant investment since the early 1980s. That is evident by the state of the road. The surface has been tinkered with, but there has been no significant work, such as road-widening.
The road floods at many places, and heavy rainfall makes it treacherous. If there is a storm, the road is closed because it is too dangerous to use. Waves from Strangford Lough crash onto the road, and sections of it have been eaten away by the storms, wind and tides that occur at certain times of the year. Closure of the road, as experienced this year, leaves many people stranded, adding at least 30 or 40 minutes to each journey, because drivers must use an alternative road down the middle of the Ards Peninsula. That can cause great difficulties in medical emergencies.
People’s lives have been, and continue to be, put at risk because of the lack of investment in the A20. A delay in the arrival of the emergency services because of the poor quality of the road or its closure could mean that someone who has suffered a stroke, heart attack or seizure, or even someone who has been involved in a traffic accident, does not get the urgent attention that they need.
The situation is compounded by the fact — and this is not the Minister’s responsibility — that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety will not set up an ambulance outstation on the peninsula, leaving it to be covered by the Ards depot, which must use the A20, which is sometimes cut off from Newtownards. If the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is not prepared to help the people of the lower peninsula, we urge the Minister for Regional Development to use his Department’s influence to try to ensure that that scheme goes ahead.
Investment is needed to ensure that the A20 is accessible and safe for all. The maintenance budget for the past 10 years has remained almost unchanged. Although the volume of traffic and demands on the road have increased, it is a pity that the money that is needed simply to maintain the road — not to build a new road — has not matched those demands. The road must be made safe and user-friendly and must be able to withstand the increasing volume of traffic not just over the past 20 years, but also over the next 20 years.
The road will carry more and more tourists. Ards Borough Council is committed to a tourism policy, and more tourists are visiting as a result. If more tourists should come to the country, we will try to attract them to the peninsula’s shores. It is therefore imperative that visitors have a safe, modern road when they visit what we believe are some of the most historic and beautiful sites in Northern Ireland. For those of us who live in the area, Strangford Lough is undoubtedly the jewel in the crown of the Ards Peninsula, if not the whole of Northern Ireland.
There are roads dating back to the 1970s and 1980s. More infrastructure investment is needed, especially on the A20, so that we can make the most of the area and improve the overall impression of the country and the area that we represent.

Mr Cedric Wilson: I thank Kieran McCarthy for bringing this matter up. I have clocked up hundreds of thousands of miles on that road over the past 40 years, and I know every corner and every twist and turn in it.
All of us could describe horrific accidents that have occurred on the road. If the statistics were made known, and given the length of the road, it is probably one of the greatest accident black spots in the Province. Many of my constituents refer to it as "the highway to hell" because of the numbers of fatalities that have occurred and the number of people who have been severely injured and who will have to be cared for for the rest of their lives.
Regarding the condition of the road — apart from its dangerous corners and twists — public transport providers have said that vehicles using the A20 require more frequent replacement of suspension and shock absorbers than those on any other route throughout the Province. That is a fair indication of the poor condition of the A20.
The condition of the road, coupled with underinvestment in road infrastructure on the Ards Peninsula and the massive development that is taking place along its length and breadth, makes a very dangerous cocktail. The A20 cannot deal with the current volume of traffic.
It would be interesting if the Department were to examine the number of planning applications that have been approved in the last four or five years, together with those currently coming on stream. Mr Hamilton referred to 7,000 new dwellings in the Ards area, and few people know that many of those houses are being built between the floodgates and Portaferry.
A disproportionate number of houses are being built at the tip of the Ards Peninsula; there are plans to build between 900 and 1,200 dwellings close to my home. If we accept that there are two cars per dwelling — and few families have fewer than two cars: families with growing children sometimes have more — there is the potential for many thousands more vehicles to be thrown onto those roads in the coming years.
The Planning Service needs to address the problem immediately. People in the villages, towns and hamlets on both sides of the Ards Peninsula must demand answers from the Planning Service about why it can continue to approve large-scale building developments when it is known that the road and sewerage infrastructures are not capable of dealing with the current situation. Developers are driving a coach and horses through the legislation.
All Members, especially those who serve on Ards Borough Council, know that developers deliberately avoid public inquiries into some large-scale developments by submitting their planning applications piecemeal. They apply for planning permission for 100 dwellings or fewer, rather than for the full number of dwellings that they intend to develop. I do not know how, but that must be addressed. It must be made clear that the Planning Service will place a moratorium on large-scale building developments on the Ards Peninsula until the infrastructure has been dealt with. No one is grasping the nettle.
Before anything happens, we shall hear of more fatalities. I appeal to those with responsibility to give top priority to the Newtownards to Portaferry road; it deserves nothing less.

Mr Peter Robinson: I congratulate Mr McCarthy on securing the Adjournment debate and for raising an important subject that is of concern to all Members from his constituency.
The A20 from Newtownards to Portaferry, which is 19 miles long, is, as Mr McCarthy stated, sinuous in nature, following as it does for much of its length the inside coast of the Ards Peninsula. It is the main route servicing the peninsula, and passes through the villages of Greyabbey and Kircubbin. It carries a two-way traffic flow and is the main distributor road southwards on the Ards Peninsula.
Traffic flow decreases towards Portaferry. Although the most recent data shows that the traffic level just south of Newtownards stands at about 10,400 vehicles a day, at the Portaferry end it decreases to 2,700 vehicles a day. The road is a standard single carriageway on which the 60 miles an hour national speed limit applies — except through the villages to which I referred, where a 30 miles an hour speed limit applies. A large amount of holiday and leisure traffic uses the route at weekends and during the summer months. It is, therefore, an important road and commuter route for those who live on the peninsula. Although passing opportunities are severely limited by the road’s alignment, and slow-moving vehicles can cause driver frustration, no specific congestion occurs on the route.
The Roads Service recently carried out several improvement schemes on the route, directed at road safety. They include an environmental improvement scheme, costing £110,000, that was substantially completed in Greyabbey earlier this year. In addition to environmental aspects, that scheme also improved the profile of Lower Main Street and incorporated carriageway resurfacing, street lighting, a short length of footpath at the local primary school and improved signing to show the school’s proximity to the carriageway. I have noted some of Mr McCarthy’s criticisms, and I shall consider them.
Mr McCarthy also criticised the traffic-calming scheme that was completed in Kircubbin last month at a cost of £18,000. The scheme included the provision of entry gateway features, lay-by central road markers, kerb buildouts, colour surfacing and signing. I shall consider the Member’s criticism of the kerb buildouts.
A scheme costing £10,000 to provide higher friction surfacing and a crash barrier at a bend at Ballygarvan was completed in September 2001, and an £8,000 improvement scheme at Kelly’s Corner was completed in September 1999. In addition to those improvement schemes, during the past seven years the Roads Service has resurfaced, or surface-dressed, some five miles between Newtownards and Portaferry. That is about a quarter of the 19-mile route. That work cost approximately £300,000.
I was privileged to launch the new ferry, the MV Portaferry II, for the Strangford Lough ferry service last January. That was paid for by the Roads Service budget for the area. The new vessel cost approximately £2·7 million and was essential for the development of social and economic links between the Ards Peninsula and south Down.
As Members are aware, the resources available for the roads programme are finite, and funds for major road improvements are being targeted largely at schemes to upgrade the regional strategic transport network as defined in the regional development strategy. I would point out to Members who criticise the proposed regional transportation strategy — because we have not had that strategy yet — that there are no specific schemes for the area. The regional development strategy, which was unanimously supported by the Assembly, did not include the A20, so the Roads Service has no plans to upgrade the route significantly. The Roads Service recognised that it had to concentrate on the regional strategic transport network as opposed to other roads.
Resources available for those schemes would not permit a comprehensive realignment scheme, so any changes to the A20 would have to be carried out through minor road improvements or road maintenance schemes. That will require the Department to look at several issues, such as the realignments and accident reviews. We would also look at temporary calming assessment proposals as well as targeting accident sites for possible re-engineering. In that context, the Roads Service is assessing the feasibility of a bend realignment scheme at Ballygarvan. If the scheme is viable, it will be considered for possible inclusion in the future minor works programme. The Roads Service also plans to surface-dress a three quarter mile section of the A20 north of the Cunningham Road and south of the Mountstewart Road later this year.
Considering that it is not part of the regional strategic network, I trust that the investments that I have mentioned illustrate that my Department will continue to be committed to doing what is possible in the area using the available resources.
I would like to respond to some of the specific points raised in the debate. Mr McCarthy mentioned compensation, and that is always a matter of concern for those who seek compensation because their vehicles have been damaged but who do not automatically get it through the Department. However, that is only the first stage of the process, and people can challenge any decision by the Department for Regional Development in the courts. The Department has been severely criticised for paying out directly and without testing claims. It was criticised by the Westminster Public Accounts Committee in one case for meeting compensation claims. The Department is required to have objective criteria to determine whether payments are made.
The Member also asked the rhetorical question about where the car tax goes. However, he moved on quickly because I suspect he knows the answer. The money goes to the Exchequer; unfortunately, not to the Department for Regional Development. However, there has been some talk, although it has not amounted to much, that there will be some direct hypothecation for car tax. That would be desirable.
Mr Hamilton, the Member for Strangford, made a mean-spirited statement that did not relate to the subject, but as he has put it on the public record it is right that it should be answered. It is curious that someone who sneaked into the Assembly through the back door and who has no mandate to be here would call someone a temporary Member, even though that Member has been elected by the people and has a clear majority at Westminster.
The Member is more likely than any elected representative to be given that label. He was obviously never an accountant and is incapable of understanding statistics, or he would not have made those remarks. Those Strangford electors who live in Castlereagh will be interested to note how little he cares for their welfare. Those who live in Ards will not consider him to have done them any favours when they realise the way in which he mangled the statistics to reach that conclusion. If he had looked at the Roads Service budget for the Ards area as a whole, he would have seen that expenditure over the past three years has been greater in Ards than in Castlereagh. However, the Member managed to exclude parts of the roads budget, such as the expenditure on the Strangford ferry. He should not demean that, because it is only by its inclusion in the budget as a "road extension" that it can be paid for by the Department for Regional Development.

Mr Tom Hamilton: Will the Minister give way?

Mr Peter Robinson: I will give way in a moment, but first I will really give the Member something to answer.
In addition, the Member did not bother to mention that I announced my Department’s intention to construct the Comber bypass at the cost of some £3 million to £4 million. If he were to add that to his figures, he might well find that it would be the people of Castlereagh who would be asking why they were getting the rough end of the stick. I will give way to the Member, and I hope that he has more sense this time.

Mr Tom Hamilton: Does the Minister accept that the figures that I gave were from a written answer, provided by his Department?

Mr Peter Robinson: No, I do not accept that. Those figures were only part of the answer. If the Member cannot take the information in by listening, he might like to read it in the report of the proceedings. If he had listened to what I said, he would know that the total expenditure is greater than the sum of the figures that he added together. If he were to look at the total roads expenditure — rather than only the items that he decided to take into account — he would see that Ards comes ahead of Castlereagh.
As I pointed out to him, the further expenditure that has been announced by the Department for Regional Development for the Comber bypass will put Ards well ahead of Castlereagh. Therefore when those figures are produced for him, I hope that the Member will show as much interest in the Castlereagh electors of Strangford as he does in the Ards electors of Strangford.
The distribution of expenditure is decided objectively by the Roads Service professionals on the basis of the needs in the various areas of the Province. If the Member does not like money being spent on the regional strategic transport network, he will have to explain to his constituents why the Assembly unanimously supported it. I did not hear any voice from Strangford saying that it was the wrong policy to adopt.
It is also important to say that there has been a significant increase in the proposals for the Strangford constituency since devolution. I have heard no words of thanks or praise from the Member for the substantial increase since devolution and since I have had responsibility for the Department. It contrasts with the negligence during the years when his party had the Strangford parliamentary seat and, therefore, the responsibility for bringing infrastructural improvements into the area.
Various Members, including Mr Cedric Wilson and Mr Jim Shannon, spoke about road safety in the constituency, and it is a matter of significant concern. Believe it or not, I could quote the professional findings of the comparative road safety record for this area, as opposed to the rest of the Province. The figure is almost exactly the same as the Province-wide average, which is not a particularly high level. However, Members are right to say that it is still high. The road accident statistics for Northern Ireland are much higher than any Government Minister would find acceptable, and, therefore, we must deal with the problem.
We therefore have a policy. Road accidents occur for many different reasons. Road accidents are not always the fault of the road and are not always something that can be dealt with by a Minister. One determines whether it is the fault of the road by looking at road accident clusters. A cluster is a series of accidents that have occurred at the same spot over three years. However, there are no clusters on the peninsula. There have been several accidents, but they have not followed any particular locational pattern, which makes it more difficult to get an engineering response.
The issue raised by Cedric Wilson with regard to what I would describe as "incremental development" is a sleight of hand and is not restricted to developers on the peninsula. Many developers across the Province attempt to avoid any major infrastructural improvement by putting in a lower level of houses for development. Although the number they put in might be dealt with by the existing road network or by some minor changes to it, they still have to bring forward their further proposals. Those are then factored into the requirements for the infrastructure. If the two proposals together require major improvements, then the second part of their development must carry that infrastructural cost. Although they may get away in the smoke in the first instance, when they come back for the full scheme they will be caught.
My Department’s Roads Service will always give advice to the Department of the Environment’s Planning Service on these issues. However, as Minster, I am not satisfied with the present arrangements for developer contributions. Changes are required, not just for roads but for water as well. The proposed regional transport strategy has a section dealing with funding through developer contributions, and we need to look at these issues.
Mr Shannon made the point about pedestrian crossings. Both he and Mr McCarthy have raised the issue of a pedestrian crossing in this area with me, and I have agreed to look at this. Even with the technical advice I get, I find it very difficult to unravel the formula for pedestrian crossings, which is almost like an algebraic formula. If we are going to make people believe that we are following objective criteria, we require objective criteria that they understand. We need to get the road-speak out of the formula so that people can understand how the decisions are taken — what is the factor that can cause a change in the decision to put a pedestrian crossing in place or not. I am happy to look at that issue so that we can have a formula that is more easily understood and has greater public confidence.
Finally, I am aware that the Member of Parliament for the area has been seeking a meeting to look at these issues, and I will ensure that this meeting is set up and processed. We can arrange a site visit, as it is always much better to see these issues first-hand. We can then see what steps can be taken beyond those I have already referred to.
Adjourned at 4.49 pm